De cognitionibus libri
Ex libro III
Dig. 8,3,16Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Divus Pius aucupibus ita rescripsit: οὐκ ἔστιν εὔλογον ἀκόντων τῶν δεσποτῶν ὑμᾶς ἐν ἀλλοτρίοις χωρίοις ἰξεύειν.
Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript to bird-catchers, “It is not proper for you to catch birds on the land of others without the consent of the owners”.
Dig. 33,10,14Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Fundo legato instrumentum eius non aliter legato cedit, nisi specialiter id expressum sit: nam et domo legata neque instrumentum eius neque supellex aliter legato cedit, quam si id ipsum nominatim expressum a testatore fuerit.
Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. When a tract of land is devised, its equipment will not be embraced in the legacy, unless this was expressly mentioned; for where a house is devised, neither its utensils nor its furniture are included, unless this was explicitly stated by the testator.
Dig. 40,8,3Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Eum, qui ita venit, ut intra tempus manumitteretur, cum dies praestandae libertatis venerit vivente venditore et perseverante in eadem voluntate, perinde haberi, ac si ab eo, a quo debuit manumitti, manumissus esset: mortuo autem venditore non esse heredum eius voluntatem explorandam divus Marcus cum filio suo rescripsit.
Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. Where a slave has been sold on condition of being manumitted within a certain time, and the day appointed for Eis freedom arrives during the lifetime of the vendor, and the latter has not changed his mind, the result is that the slave will be manumitted, just as if this had been done by the person who should have liberated him; but if the vendor should be dead, the Divine Marcus and his son stated in a Rescript that it was not necessary to obtain the consent of his heirs.
Dig. 42,1,32Idem libro tertio cognitionum. Cum prolatis constitutionibus contra eas pronuntiat iudex, eo quod non existimat causam, de qua iudicat, per eas iuvari, non videtur contra constitutiones sententiam dedisse. ideoque ab eiusmodi sententia appellandum est: alioquin rei iudicatae stabitur.
The Same, Judicial Inquiries, Book III. Where a judge rules against constitutions which are cited, for the reason that he does not think them to be applicable to the case in question, he is not considered to have ruled against them improperly, and therefore an appeal can be taken from his decision; otherwise the matter will be held to have been finally determined.
Dig. 47,21,2Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Divus Hadrianus in haec verba rescripsit: ‘Quin pessimum factum sit eorum, qui terminos finium causa positos propulerunt, dubitari non potest. de poena tamen modus ex condicione personae et mente facientis magis statui potest: nam si splendidiores personae sunt, quae convincuntur, non dubie occupandorum alienorum finium causa id admiserunt, et possunt in tempus, ut cuiusque patiatur aetas, relegari, id est si iuvenior, in longius, si senior, recisius. si vero alii negotium gesserunt et ministerio functi sunt, castigari et ad opus biennio dari. quod si per ignorantiam aut fortuito lapides furati sunt, sufficiet eos verberibus decidere’.
Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. The Divine Hadrian stated the following in a Rescript. There can be no doubt that those who remove monuments placed to establish boundaries are guilty of a very wicked act. In fixing the penalty, however, its degree should be determined by the rank and intention of the individual who perpetrated the crime, for if persons of eminent rank are convicted, there is no doubt that they committed the act for the purpose of obtaining the land of others, and they can be relegated for a certain time, dependent upon their age; that is to say, if the accused is very young, he should be exiled for a longer time; if he is old, for a shorter time. Where others have transacted their business, and have furnished their services, they shall be chastised and sentenced to hard labor on the public works for two years. If, however, they removed the monuments through ignorance, or accidentally, it will be sufficient to have them whipped.
Dig. 48,10,31Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Divus Pius Claudio rescripsit pro mensura cuiusque delicti constituendum in eos, qui apud iudices instrumenta protulerunt, quae probari non possint: aut si plus meruisse videatur, quam ex forma iurisdictionis pati possint, ut imperatori describatur aestimaturo, quatenus coerceri debeant. sed divus Marcus cum fratre suo pro sua humanitate hanc rem temperavit, ut, si (quod plerumque evenit) per errorem huiusmodi instrumenta proferantur, ignoscatur eis, qui tale quicquam protulerint.
Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript addressed to Claudius: “Any persons who introduce instruments into court which cannot be proved shall be punished according to the nature of each offence; or, if they seem to have deserved a more serious penalty than can be imposed upon them under this jurisdiction, the facts may be stated to the Emperor, in order that he may determine what punishment shall be inflicted upon them.” The Emperor Marcus, along with his Brother, however, influenced by feelings of humanity, mitigated this punishment; so that if, (as frequently happens), such documents should be produced by mistake, those who did anything of this kind may be pardoned.
Dig. 50,11,2Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Si quis ipsos cultores agrorum vel piscatores deferre utensilia in civitatem iusserit, ut ipsi ea distrahant, destituetur annonae praebitio, cum avocentur ab opere rustici: qui confestim ubi detulerint mercem, tradere eam et ad opera sua reverti debeant. denique summae prudentiae et auctoritatis apud Graecos Plato cum institueret, quemadmodum civitas bene beate habitari possit, in primis istos negotiatores necessarios duxit. sic enim libro secundo πολιτείας ait: δεῖ γὰρ πλειόνων ἄρα γεωργῶν τε καὶ τῶν ἄλλων δημιουργῶν καὶ τῶν ἄλλων διακόνων τῶν γε εἰσαξόντων καὶ ἐξαξόντων ἕκαστα· οὗτοι δέ εἰσιν ἔμποροι. κομίσας δὲ ὁ γεωργὸς εἰς τὴν ἀγοράν τι ὧν ποιεῖ ἤ τις ἄλλος τῶν δημιουργῶν μὴ εἰς τὸν αὐτὸν χρόνον ἥκῃ τοῖς δεομένοις τὰ παρ’ αὐτοῦ ἀνταλλὰξασθαι, ἀργήσει τῆς αὑτοῦ δημιουργίας καθήμενος ἐν ἀγορᾷ; οὐδαμῶς, ἦ δ’ ὅς, ἀλλ’ εἰσὶν οἳ τοῦτο ὁρῶντες ἑαυτοὺς ἐπὶ τὴν διακονίαν τάττουσι ταύτην.
Callistratus, Judicial Inquiries, Book III. When anyone orders the cultivators of land and fishermen to bring provisions into a city, in order that they themselves may dispose of them, for the reason that the supply of provisions will be diminished when the farmers are called away from their work, those who bring in the merchandise must deliver it immediately after doing so, and return to their labors. Hence, Plato displayed the highest wisdom and authority who while he was teaching among the Greeks, stated that in order for a city to be prosperous, and its people to be happy, it must, in the first place, attract all such merchants as were necessary; for, in the First Book on Civil Intercourse, he said: “A city is in need of many farmers, and other laborers and artisans, as well as of those who bring in and carry away articles of commerce, for these are traders. Where, however, a farmer brings to market anything which he produced, or any other laborer does so, and he does not immediately encounter someone who desires to exchange wares with him, will it be necessary for him to remain sitting in his place in the market until he disposes of his commodities? By no means, for there are those who, seeing this, may offer their services for the disposal of the merchandise.”