Epistularum et variarum lectionum libri
Ex libro IX
Dig. 4,4,50Pomponius libro nono epistularum et variarum lectionum. Iunius Diophantus Pomponio suo salutem. Minor viginti quinque annis novandi animo intercessit pro eo, qui temporali actione tenebatur, tunc cum adhuc supererant decem dies, et postea in integrum restitutus est: utrum restitutio, quae creditori adversus priorem debitorem datur, decem dierum sit an plenior? ego didici ex tempore in integrum restitutionis tantundem temporis praestandum, quantum supererat: tu quid de eo putas velim rescribas. respondit: sine dubio, quod de temporali actione, in qua intercessit minor, sensisti, puto verius esse: ideoque et pignus, quod dederat prior debitor, manet obligatum.
Pomponius, Letters and Various Passages, Book IX. “Julius Diophantus, to his friend Pomponius, Greeting. A minor under twenty-five years of age, with the intention of renewing a contract, intervened in behalf of the party who was liable in an action which would be barred by lapse of time, while ten days of said time still remained, and he afterwards obtained complete restitution. Should the right of restitution be granted to the creditor against the former debtor, for ten days, or for a longer period? I held that so much time should be granted from the day of complete restitution as remained, and I wish that you would write to me what you think about it.” I answered, I undoubtedly think that your opinion with respect to the right of action dependent upon the time in which the minor intervened, is the more correct one; and therefore that the pledge which the former gave will still remain encumbered.