Si quadrupes pauperiem fecisse dicatur
(Concerning the Commission of Damage by a Quadruped.)
1 Ulpianus libro octavo decimo ad edictum. Si quadrupes pauperiem fecisse dicetur, actio ex lege duodecim tabularum descendit: quae lex voluit aut dari id quod nocuit, id est id animal quod noxiam commisit, aut aestimationem noxiae offerre. 1Noxia autem est ipsum delictum. 2Quae actio ad omnes quadrupedes pertinet. 3Ait praetor ‘pauperiem fecisse’. pauperies est damnum sine iniuria facientis datum: nec enim potest animal iniuria fecisse, quod sensu caret. 4Itaque, ut Servius scribit, tunc haec actio locum habet, cum commota feritate nocuit quadrupes, puta si equus calcitrosus calce percusserit, aut bos cornu petere solitus petierit, aut mulae propter nimiam ferociam: quod si propter loci iniquitatem aut propter culpam mulionis, aut si plus iusto onerata quadrupes in aliquem onus everterit, haec actio cessabit damnique iniuriae agetur. 5Sed et si canis, cum duceretur ab aliquo, asperitate sua evaserit et alicui damnum dederit: si contineri firmius ab alio poterit vel si per eum locum induci non debuit, haec actio cessabit et tenebitur qui canem tenebat. 6Sed et si instigatu alterius fera damnum dederit, cessabit haec actio. 7Et generaliter haec actio locum habet, quotiens contra naturam fera mota pauperiem dedit: ideoque si equus dolore concitatus calce petierit, cessare istam actionem, sed eum, qui equum percusserit aut vulneraverit, in factum magis quam lege Aquilia teneri, utique ideo, quia non ipse suo corpore damnum dedit. at si, cum equum permulsisset quis vel palpatus esset, calce eum percusserit, erit actioni locus. 8Et si alia quadrupes aliam concitavit ut damnum daret, eius quae concitavit nomine agendum erit. 9Sive autem corpore suo pauperiem quadrupes dedit, sive per aliam rem, quam tetigit quadrupes, haec actio locum habebit: ut puta si plaustro bos obtrivit aliquem vel alia re deiecta. 10In bestiis autem propter naturalem feritatem haec actio locum non habet: et ideo si ursus fugit et sic nocuit, non potest quondam dominus conveniri, quia desinit dominus esse, ubi fera evasit: et ideo et si eum occidi, meum corpus est. 11Cum arietes vel boves commississent et alter alterum occidit, Quintus Mucius distinxit, ut si quidem is perisset qui adgressus erat, cessaret actio, si is, qui non provocaverat, competeret actio: quamobrem eum sibi aut noxam sarcire aut in noxam dedere oportere. 12Et cum etiam in quadrupedibus noxa caput sequitur, adversus dominum haec actio datur, non cuius fuerit quadrupes, cum noceret, sed cuius nunc est. 13Plane si ante litem contestatam decesserit animal, extincta erit actio. 14Noxae autem dedere est animal tradere vivum. demum si commune plurium sit animal, adversus singulos erit in solidum noxalis actio, sicuti in homine. 15Interdum autem dominus in hoc non convenietur, ut noxae dedat, sed etiam in solidum, ut puta si in iure interrogatus, an sua quadrupes esset, responderit non esse suam: nam si constiterit esse eius, in solidum condemnabitur. 16Si post litem contestatam ab alio sit animal occisum, quia domino legis Aquiliae actio competit, ratio in iudicio habebitur legis Aquiliae, quia dominus noxae dedendae facultatem amiserit: ergo ex iudicio proposito litis aestimationem offeret, nisi paratus fuerit actionem mandare adversus eum qui occidit. 17Hanc actionem nemo dubitaverit heredi dari ceterisque successoribus: item adversus heredes ceterosque non iure successionis, sed eo iure, quo domini sint, competit.
1 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVIII. Where a quadruped is said to have committed damage, an action which has come down from a Law of the Twelve Tables may be brought; which Law prescribes that either whatever caused the damage must be given up, that is, that the animal that committed it shall be surrendered, or an amount of money equivalent to the damage shall be paid. 1The term “noxia” means the offence itself. 2This action has reference to every kind of quadruped. 3The Prætor says “pauperiem fecisse”, which signifies the damage caused without wrong by the animal which commits it, for an animal cannot be guilty of wrong in law, because it is deficient in reason. 4Therefore, as Servius states, this action is available where an animal commits damage after its ferocity has been aroused; for example, where a horse which has the habit of kicking, kicks, or an ox which is accustomed to butt, does so; or a mule commits damage by reason of extreme savageness. But if an animal should upset a load on anyone on account of the inequality of the ground, or the negligence of the driver, or because the animal was overloaded; this action will not lie, but proceedings must be instituted for wrongful injury. 5Where, however, a dog, while he is being led by someone, breaks away on account of his viciousness, and inflicts injury upon another; then if he could have been held more securely by some one else, or if the party should not have led him through that place, this action will not lie, and the party who had charge of the dog will be liable. 6Moreover, this action will not lie if the savage animal causes any damage through the instigation of another. 7And, generally speaking, this action can be brought whenever a savage animal does any damage which is contrary to its nature, and, therefore, if a horse irritated by pain, kicks, this action will not lie; but the party who struck or wounded the horse will be liable rather to an action in factum, than under the Lex Aquilia, for no other reason than that the party did not commit the injury with his own body. But where anyone caresses a horse, or pats him, and he is kicked by it, there will be ground for this action. 8Where one animal provokes another and causes it to commit some damage, the action must be brought with reference to the one that caused the provocation. 9This action is available whether the animal committed the damage with its own body or through something else with which it was in contact; as for instance, where an ox bruises someone by means of a wagon or by anything else that is upset. 10This action will not be available in the case of wild beasts, on account of their natural ferocity; and therefore if a bear should escape and commit damage, its former owner cannot be sued, because when the animal escaped he ceased to be the owner; and therefore, even if I should kill it, the carcass will be mine. 11Where two rams or two bulls fight and one kills the other, Quintus Mucius makes a distinction; for he holds that the action will not lie if the one that was the aggressor is killed, but if the one not guilty of the provocation is killed, the action may be brought; and therefore the owner must either pay the damage or surrender the animal in lieu thereof. 12Also, in the case of quadrupeds, the offence follows the animal; and this action can be brought against the party to whom the animal belongs, and not against him to whom it belonged when it committed the damage. 13It is evident that if the animal should die before issue is joined, the right of action will be extinguished. 14To surrender the animal by way of reparation is to give it up while it is alive. If it belongs to several parties, an action for damages can be brought against them individually, just as in case of a slave. 15Sometimes, however, the owner will not be sued to compel him to give up the animal by way of reparation, but an action will be brought against him for the entire amount; as for instance, where having been asked in court whether the animal belongs to him he answers that it does not, and if it should be proved that it was his, judgment shall be rendered against him for the entire amount. 16If the animal should be killed by anyone after issue has been joined, since an action will lie against the owner under the Lex Aquilia, consideration of the Lex Aquilia will be taken in court, because the owner has lost the power to surrender the animal by way of reparation; and therefore, in the case which has been stated, he must tender the estimated amount of damages, unless he is ready to assign his right of action against him who killed the animal. 17There is no doubt whatever that this action will pass to an heir and the other successor of the party injured; and also that it can be brought against heirs and other successors, not by the right of succession but on the ground of ownership.
2 Paulus libro vicensimo secundo ad edictum. Haec actio non solum domino, sed etiam ei cuius interest competit, veluti ei cui res commodata est, item fulloni, quia eo quod tenentur damnum videntur pati. 1Si quis aliquem evitans, magistratum forte, in taberna proxima se immississet ibique a cane feroce laesus esset, non posse agi canis nomine quidam putant: at si solutus fuisset, contra.
2 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXII. This action will lie, not only in favor of the owner of the damaged property, but also in favor of any party in interest; as for instance, of one to whom the property was loaned, and also of a fuller, because those who are liable are held to have sustained damage. 1Where anyone who is trying to escape from another, for example, from a magistrate, betakes himself to a neighboring shop and is bitten there by a ferocious dog, certain authorities hold that he has no right of action on account of the dog; but that he would have one if the dog was loose.
3 Gaius libro septimo ad edictum provinciale. Ex hac lege iam non dubitatur etiam liberarum personarum nomine agi posse, forte si patrem familias aut filium familias vulneraverit quadrupes: scilicet ut non deformitatis ratio habeatur, cum liberum corpus aestimationem non recipiat, sed impensarum in curationem factarum et operarum amissarum quasque amissurus quis esset inutilis factus.
3 Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book VII. There is no doubt that an action can be brought under this law in behalf of persons who are free; as, for instance, where an animal wounds the head of a family, or the son of a family, provided no account is taken of disfigurement, since anyone who is free does not admit of appraisement; but account may be taken of the expenses incurred for the cure of the injury and of the loss of labor which the party could not perform for the reason that he was disabled.
4 Paulus libro vicensimo secundo ad edictum. Haec actio utilis competit et si non quadrupes, sed aliud animal pauperiem fecit.
4 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXII. An equitable action will be available under these circumstances where the damage was committed, not by a quadruped but by some other animal.
5 Alfenus libro secundo digestorum. Agaso cum in tabernam equum deduceret, mulam equus olfecit, mula calcem reiecit et crus agasoni fregit: consulebatur, possetne cum domino mulae agi, quod ea pauperiem fecisset. respondi posse.
5 Alfenus, Digest, Book II. While a groom was leading a horse to the stable of an inn, the horse sniffed at a mule, and the mule kicked and broke the groom’s leg. An opinion was requested whether suit could be brought against the owner of the mule, on the ground that it had caused the injury, and I answered that it could.