Scævola, Digest, Book II. A son who had received a slave as a preferred legacy having been asked to manumit him after a certain time, provided he had, in the interval, rendered his account to the said heir and to his brothers who were his co-heirs, gave the slave his freedom by manumission before the time had elapsed, and before the account had been rendered. The question arose whether he was liable to his brothers as trustee to render them the account for their shares? I answered that since he had liberated his slave he was not liable to his brothers as trustee, but that if he hastened to manumit him to prevent him from rendering an account to his brothers, then an action could be brought against him on the ground of fraud.

Scævola, Digest, Book II. Where minors appeared before the Governor, within the proper time, to obtain relief, and petitioned for complete restitution, and proved their age; and judgment having been granted on account of their minority; their opponents, for the purpose of preventing further proceedings before the Governor, appealed to the Emperor, and the Governor deferred the other matters which were to be decided in the action until the result of the appeal was ascertained; the question arose whether, when the examination of the appeal was concluded, and the appeal was dismissed, and the parties found to have become of age, they can bring the case to a termination, since it was not their fault that it was not finished? I answered that, considering the question as stated, the case could be tried just as if the parties were still under age. 1Lucius Titius purchased a tract of land sold by the curators of a minor, and held it in his possession for nearly six years, and greatly improved the property. I ask whether the minor has the right of complete restitution against Titius, the purchaser, if his curators are solvent? It is my opinion, from all that has been stated, that the minor would hardly be entitled to restitution, unless he preferred to reimburse the bona fide purchaser for all the expense which the latter could prove he had incurred, and especially as he could readily obtain relief, since his guardians were solvent.

The Same, Digest, Book II. A controversy arose between Castelliannus and Seius with reference to boundaries, and an arbiter was chosen in order that the matter might be settled by his award; and he rendered his decision in the presence of the parties, and established the boundaries. The question arose whether, if the award was not complied with on the part of Castellianus, liability for the penalty growing out of the arbitration was incurred? I answered that the penalty was incurred where the arbiter was not obeyed in a matter which he decided in the presence of both parties.

Scævola, Digest, Book II. It is set forth in the Imperial Constitutions that money which is paid to the detriment of anyone, does not bear interest. This was stated by the Emperors Antoninus and Verus in a Rescript as follows: “It is no more than equitable that interest should not be required on a balance due at the end of the term of an office, which the incumbent did not himself administer, nor should it be exacted from his surety, and “still less ought it to be collected from magistrates who have received security.” The result of which is that this rule should not be departed from in the future.