Ad Quintum Mucium libri
Ex libro XVIII
Dig. 40,7,29Pomponius libro octavo decimo ad Quintum Mucium. Statuliberi a ceteris servis nostris nihilo paene differunt. et ideo quod ad actiones vel ex delicto venientes vel ex negotio gesto contractu pertinet, eiusdem condicionis sunt statuliberi cuius ceteri. et ideo in publicis quoque iudiciis easdem poenas patiuntur, quas ceteri servi. 1Quintus Mucius scribit: pater familias in testamento scripserat ‘si Andronicus servus meus heredi meo dederit decem, liber esto’. deinde de his bonis coeperat controversia esse: qui se lege heredem aiebat esse, is eam hereditatem ad se pertinere dicebat, alter, qui hereditatem possidebat, aiebat testamento se heredem esse. secundum eum sententia dicta erat, qui testamento aiebat se heredem esse. deinde Andronicus quaerebat, si ipsi viginti dedisset, quoniam secundum eum sententia dicta est, futurusne esset liber an nihil videatur sententia, qua vicit, ad eam rem valere? quapropter si viginti heredi scripto dedisset et res contra possessorem iudicata esset, illum in servitute fore. Labeo hoc, quod Quintus Mucius scribit, ita putat verum esse, si re vera lege ab intestato heres fuit is qui vicit: nam si iniuria iudicis victus esset scriptus verus heres ex testamento, nihilo minus eum paruisse condicioni ei dando et liberum fore. sed verissimum est, quod et Aristo Celso rescripsit, posse dari pecuniam heredi ab intestato, secundum quem sententia dicta est, quoniam lex duodecim tabularum emptionis verbo omnem alienationem complexa videretur: non interesse, quo genere quisque dominus eius fieret et ideo hunc quoque ea lege contineri, secundum quem sententia dicta est, et liberum futurum eum, qui ei dedisset pecuniam. hunc autem, id est possessorem hereditatis, cui data esset summa, si victus esset hereditatis petitione, cum ceteris hanc quoque pecuniam victori restituere debere.
Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book XVIII. Slaves who are to be free conditionally scarcely differ, in any respect, from our other slaves. Therefore, they are in the same position as the others with reference to legal actions, whether these arise from crimes, from business transacted, or from contracts. The result of which is that in public prosecutions they are liable to the same penalties as other slaves. 1Quintus Mucius says that the head of a household stated in his will, “Let my slave Andronicus be free, provided he pays ten aurei to my heirs.” A controversy then arose with reference to the estate. One person declared that he was the heir, and alleged that it belonged to him, and another who was in possession of the estate said that he was the heir under the will. Judgment was rendered in favor of the one who said that he was the heir under the will. Then Andronicus asked, if he should pay twenty aurei to the latter, whether he would become free, as judgment had been rendered in his favor; or whether the judgment which the successful party had obtained had no reference to the matter in question; hence, if he paid the ten aurei to the appointed heir, and the case should be decided against the possessor, he would remain in slavery. Labeo thinks that the opinion of Quintus Mucius can only be true, if the heir who gained the case should be decided to be the heir at law; for if the appointed heir should be found to have lost his case, through a just decision, and be held entitled to the estate under the will, the slave by paying him, will, nevertheless, comply with the condition, and will become free. The opinion given by Aristo to Celsus is, however, perfectly correct, namely, that the money can be paid to the heir at law in favor of whom judgment has been rendered; as under the provisions of the Twelve Tables the term “purchase” is understood to have included every kind of alienation, and it makes no difference in what way any of the parties became the master of the slave; and therefore, he in favor of whom judgment was rendered is included in the law, and the slave who paid the money will be free. Moreover, if he who is in possession and to whom the money was paid should be beaten in a contest for the estate, he will be obliged to surrender the money together with the property to the party who is successful.