Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1928)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Dig. XLVIII7,
Ad legem Iuliam de vi privata
Liber quadragesimus octavus
VII.

Ad legem Iuliam de vi privata

(Concerning the Julian Law Relating to Private Violence.)

1Mar­cia­nus li­bro quar­to de­ci­mo in­sti­tu­tio­num. De vi pri­va­ta dam­na­ti pars ter­tia bo­no­rum ex le­ge Iu­lia pu­bli­ca­tur et cau­tum est, ne se­na­tor sit, ne de­cu­rio, aut ul­lum ho­no­rem ca­piat, ne­ve in eum or­di­nem se­deat, ne­ve iu­dex sit: et vi­de­li­cet om­ni ho­no­re qua­si in­fa­mis ex se­na­tus con­sul­to ca­re­bit. 1Ea­dem poe­na ad­fi­ciun­tur, qui ad poe­nam le­gis Iu­liae de vi pri­va­ta red­igun­tur, et si quis ex nau­fra­gio do­lo ma­lo quid ra­pue­rit. 2Sed et ex con­sti­tu­tio­ni­bus prin­ci­pum ex­tra or­di­nem, qui de nau­fra­giis ali­quid di­ri­pue­rint, pu­niun­tur: nam et di­vus Pius re­scrip­sit nul­lam vim nau­tis fie­ri de­be­re et, si quis fe­ce­rit, ut se­ve­ris­si­me pu­nia­tur.

1Marcianus, Institutes, Book XIV. Anyone who is convicted of private violence is punished under the Julian Law by the confiscation of the third part of his property; and it is provided that he shall not be a Senator or a decurion; or obtain any mark of distinction, or be permitted to sit with any of the above-named officials; or be a judge; and, according to the Decree of the Senate, he shall be stripped of all his honors as a person who is infamous. 1Those who are liable to the penalty of the Julian Law relating to Private Violence are subjected to the same punishment if they have been guilty of fraudulently and forcibly appropriating any goods in a shipwreck. 2Anyone who plunders property which has been shipwrecked is punished arbitrarily under the Imperial Constitutions; for the Divine Pius stated in a Rescript that no force should be employed against sailors, and if anyone did so that he should be severely punished.

2Scae­vo­la li­bro quar­to re­gu­la­rum. Hac le­ge te­ne­tur, qui con­vo­ca­tis ho­mi­ni­bus vim fe­ce­rit, quo quis ver­be­re­tur pul­sa­re­tur, ne­que ho­mo oc­ci­sus erit:

2Scævola, Rules, Book IV. He is liable under this law who, by means of a crowd of men, employs force, in consequence of which some person is beaten or struck, even if no one is killed.

3Ma­cer li­bro pri­mo pu­bli­co­rum. nec in­ter­est, li­be­ros an ser­vos et suos an alie­nos quis ad vim fa­cien­dam con­vo­ca­ve­rit. 1Nec mi­nus hi, qui con­vo­ca­ti sunt, ea­dem le­ge te­nen­tur. 2Sed si nul­li con­vo­ca­ti nul­li­que pul­sa­ti sint, per in­iu­riam ta­men ex bo­nis alie­nis quid ab­la­tum sit, hac le­ge te­ne­ri eum qui id fe­ce­rit.

3Macer, Public Prosecutions, Book I. It makes no difference whether the crowd was convoked for the purpose of employing violence against freemen, or one’s own slaves, or slaves belonging to another. 1Those who have been assembled are none the less liable under the same law. 2If, however, no persons have been assembled, and none has been beaten, but something has been unjustly taken from property belonging to others, he who did so will be liable under this law.

4Pau­lus li­bro quin­qua­gen­si­mo quin­to ad edic­tum. Le­gis Iu­liae de vi pri­va­ta cri­men com­mit­ti­tur, cum coe­tum ali­quis et con­cur­sum fe­cis­se di­ci­tur, quo mi­nus quis in ius pro­du­ce­re­tur. 1Et si quis quaes­tio­nem de al­te­rius ser­vo ha­buis­set: et id­eo mo­de­ra­tius edic­to prae­to­ris de in­iu­riis uten­dum es­se La­beo ait.

4Paulus, On the Edict, Book LV. The crime punished by the Julian Law is committed where someone is said to have assembled a crowd or a mob, to prevent a person from being produced in court. 1If anyone should put the slave of another to torture, Labeo says that the Edict of the Prætor relating to injuries can be resorted to, and thus greater moderation be displayed.

5Ul­pia­nus li­bro se­xa­gen­si­mo no­no ad edic­tum. Si quis ali­quem de­ie­cit ex agro suo ho­mi­ni­bus con­gre­ga­tis si­ne ar­mis, vis pri­va­tae pos­tu­la­ri pos­sit.

5Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book LXIX. If anyone should expel a person from his land by means of a crowd of men who are unarmed, he can be prosecuted for private violence.

6Mo­des­ti­nus li­bro oc­ta­vo re­gu­la­rum. Ex se­na­tus con­sul­to Vo­lus­ia­no, qui in­pro­be co­eunt in alie­nam li­tem, ut, quid­quid ex con­dem­na­tio­ne in rem ip­sius red­ac­tum fue­rit, in­ter eos com­mu­ni­ca­re­tur, le­ge Iu­lia de vi pri­va­ta te­nen­tur.

6Modestinus, Rules, Book VIII. Under the Volusian Decree of the Senate, those who improperly assemble in order to manifest opposition to a lawsuit of others, and agree that anything obtained from the parties by condemnation shall be divided among them, are liable under the Julian Law relating to Private Violence.

7Cal­lis­tra­tus li­bro quin­to de co­gni­tio­ni­bus. Cre­di­to­res si ad­ver­sus de­bi­to­res suos agant, per iu­di­cem id, quod de­be­ri si­bi pu­tant, re­pos­ce­re de­bent: alio­quin si in rem de­bi­to­ris sui in­tra­ve­rint id nul­lo con­ce­den­te, di­vus Mar­cus de­cre­vit ius cre­di­ti eos non ha­be­re. ver­ba de­cre­ti haec sunt. ‘Op­ti­mum est, ut, si quas pu­tas te ha­be­re pe­ti­tio­nes, ac­tio­ni­bus ex­pe­ria­ris: in­ter­im il­le in pos­ses­sio­ne de­bet mo­ra­ri, tu pe­ti­tor es’. et cum Mar­cia­nus di­ce­ret: ‘vim nul­lam fe­ci’: Cae­sar di­xit: ‘tu vim pu­tas es­se so­lum, si ho­mi­nes vul­ne­ren­tur? vis est et tunc, quo­tiens quis id, quod de­be­ri si­bi pu­tat, non per iu­di­cem re­pos­cit. non pu­to au­tem nec ve­re­cun­diae nec dig­ni­ta­ti nec pie­ta­ti tuae con­ve­ni­re quic­quam non iu­re fa­ce­re. quis­quis igi­tur pro­ba­tus mi­hi fue­rit rem ul­lam de­bi­to­ris non ab ip­so si­bi tra­di­tam si­ne ul­lo iu­di­ce te­me­re pos­si­de­re, eum­que si­bi ius in eam rem di­xis­se, ius cre­di­ti non ha­be­bit’.

7Ad Dig. 48,7,7Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 123, Note 1.Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book V. Creditors, who proceed against their debtors, should demand a second time, through the judge, what they think to be due to them. Otherwise, if they enter upon the property of the debtor without permission having been given them to do so, the Divine Marcus decreed that they had no longer any right to their claims. The following are the terms of the Decree: “It is very proper, where you think that you have claims, that you should attempt to collect them by means of actions. In the meantime, the other party should remain in possession, for you are merely the plaintiff.” And when Marcianus said that no force had been employed, the Emperor replied: “You think that force is only employed when men are wounded. Force is employed when anyone thinks that he can take what is due to him without demanding it a second time through the judge. I do not think that it is consistent either with your character for reserve or your dignity, to commit an act which is unauthorized by law. Therefore, whenever it is proved to me that any property of the debtor was not delivered by him to his creditor, but that the latter boldly took possession of it without being authorized by a court, and he has declared that he was entitled to the property, he will forfeit his right to the claim.”

8Mo­des­ti­nus li­bro se­cun­do de poe­nis. Si cre­di­tor si­ne auc­to­ri­ta­te iu­di­cis res de­bi­to­ris oc­cu­pet, hac le­ge te­ne­tur et ter­tia par­te bo­no­rum mul­ta­tur et in­fa­mis fit.

8Modestinus, On Punishments, Book II. Where a creditor, without judicial authority, seizes the property of his debtor, he is liable under this law, will be fined a third part of his property, and will become infamous.