De omnibus tribunalibus libri
Ex libro I
Dig. 1,14,4Idem libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Praetor neque tutorem neque specialem iudicem ipse se dare potest.
The Same, On All Tribunals, Book I. A Prætor cannot appoint himself a guardian, or a judge in any special proceeding.
Dig. 1,18,5Idem libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Praeses provinciae non magis tutorem quam specialem iudicem ipse se dare potest.
The Same, On All Tribunals, Book I. The Governor of a province cannot appoint himself either a guardian, or a judge in a particular case.
Dig. 26,5,7Idem libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Non tantum ad dotem dandam nupturae curatorem dari oportet, verum etiam ei quoque, quae iam nupta est. sed et ad dotem augendam datur et mutandae quoque dotis gratia curator dari potest.
The Same, On All Courts, Book I. Not only must a curator be appointed for a girl about to be married, for the bestowal of her dowry; but one must also be appointed for a minor who is already married. A curator is also appointed for the purpose of increasing the dowry, or in order that some change may be made with reference to it.
Dig. 26,10,2Idem libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Libertus quoque si fraudulenter gessisse tutelam filiorum patroni probetur, ad praefectum urbis remittetur puniendus.
The Same, On All Tribunals, Book I. A freedman shall also be sent to the Prefect of the City for punishment, if he is proved to have fraudulently administered the guardianship of the children of his patron.
Dig. 26,10,4Idem libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Hae enim causae faciunt, ut integra existimatione tutela vel cura quis abeat. 1Decreto igitur debebit causa removendi significari, ut appareat de existimatione. 2Quid ergo si non significaverit causam remotionis decreto suo? Papinianus ait debuisse dici hunc integrae esse famae, et est verum. 3Si praetor sententia sua non removerit tutela, sed gerere prohibuit, dicendum est magis esse, ut et hic desinat tutor esse. 4Qui nihil gesserunt, non possunt suspecti postulari, verum ob ignaviam vel neglegentiam vel dolum, si dolo fecerunt, possunt removeri.
The Same, On All Tribunals, Book I. There are reasons why anyone may relinquish a guardianship or a curatorship and preserve his reputation. 1Therefore, the cause of his removal should be mentioned in the decree, in order that it may be known that the reputation of the guardian does not suffer. 2But what if the magistrate did not, in his decree, indicate the cause of the removal? Papinianus says that this should not affect the good name of the guardian; which is correct. 3If the Prætor by his decision does not remove the guardian from office, but forbids him to discharge its duties, it must be said that the better opinion is that he ceases to be a guardian. 4Those who have administered none of the affairs of the trust cannot be accused of being suspicious; they can, however, be removed on the ground of idleness, negligence, or fraud, if they have acted dishonestly.
Dig. 26,10,7Ulpianus libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Impuberibus quidem non permittitur suspectos facere: adulescentibus plane volentibus suspectos facere curatores suos permittitur, dummodo ex consilio necessariorum id faciant. 1Si fraus non sit admissa, sed lata neglegentia, quia ista prope fraudem accedit, removeri hunc quasi suspectum oportet. 2Praeterea accesserunt quaedam species ex epistula imperatoris nostri et divi Severi ad Atrium Clonium: nam adversus eos, qui, ne alimenta decernantur, sui copiam perseverant non facere, ut suis rebus careant praecipitur reique servandae causa pupillus in possessionem mittatur eius, qui suspectus sententia sua factus est quaeque mora deteriora futura sunt curatore dato distrahi iubentur. 3Item si quis tutor datus non compareat, solet edictis evocari, novissimeque si copiam sui non fecerit, ut suspectus removeri ob hoc ipsum, quod copiam sui non fecit. quod et perraro et diligenti habita inquisitione faciendum est.
Ulpianus, On All Tribunals, Book I. Children under the age of puberty are not permitted to denounce their guardians as suspicious; but it is clear that minors are allowed to denounce their curators in this manner, if they desire to do so; provided that they act under the advice of their near relatives. 1Where not fraud, but gross negligence which very nearly resembles fraud, has been committed by a guardian, he should be removed, as being suspicious. 2In the consideration of this subject, certain additional provisions were made by a Rescript of our Emperor and the Divine Severus, addressed to Atrius Clonius; for they decreed that, where guardians did not appear in cases involving the distribution of supplies to their wards, they should be deprived of their property, and that the ward should be placed in possession of the effects of him who had been pronounced suspicious by the decree, for the purpose of preserving the same, and if it was perishable, or liable to be diminished in value by delay, it was ordered to be sold, after the appointment of a curator. 3Moreover, if a guardian does not appear after having been appointed, it is customary to summon him by several proclamations, and finally, if he does not present himself, he should be removed from office, because of his non-appearance. This proceeding should only be resorted to very rarely, and after a careful investigation has been made.
Dig. 27,2,3Idem libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Ius alimentorum decernendorum pupillis praetori competit, ut ipse moderetur, quam summam tutores vel curatores ad alimenta pupillis vel adulescentibus praestare debeant. 1Modum autem patrimonii spectare debet, cum alimenta decernit: et debet statuere tam moderate, ut non universum reditum patrimonii in alimenta decernat, sed semper sit, ut aliquid ex reditu supersit. 2Ante oculos habere debet in decernendo et mancipia, quae pupillis deserviunt, et mercedes pupillorum et vestem et tectum pupilli: aetatem etiam contemplari, in qua constitutus est cui alimenta decernuntur. 3In amplis tamen patrimoniis positis non cumulus patrimonii, sed quod exhibitioni frugaliter sufficit modum alimentis dabit. 4Sed si non constat, quis modus facultatium sit, inter tutorem et eum, qui alimenta decerni desiderat, suscipere debet cognitionem nec temere alimenta decernere, ne in alterutram partem delinquat: prius tamen exigere debet, ut profiteatur tutor, quae sit penes se summa, et comminari graviores ei usuras infligi eius, quod supra professionem apud eum fuerit comprehensum. 5Idem ad instructionem quoque pupillorum vel adulescentium pupillarum vel earum, quae intra vicensimum annum constitutae sunt, solet decernere respectu facultatium et aetatis eorum qui instruuntur. 6Sed si egeni sint pupilli, de suo eos alere tutor non compellitur. et si forte post decreta alimenta ad egestatem fuerit pupillus perductus, deminui debent quae decreta sunt, quemadmodum solent augeri, si quid patrimonio accesserit.
The Same, On All Tribunals. The Prætor has the right to determine the amount to be allotted for the maintenance of wards; and he himself must apportion the sum which guardians or curators shall expend for the maintenance of wards or minors. 1When the Prætor renders his decision with reference to maintenance, he must take into consideration the value of the estate, and make the allowance with such a degree of moderation as not to permit the entire income of the estate to be expended for the support of the ward; but the allowance must always be made in such a way that a balance of the income will remain. 2In rendering his decision, he must bear in mind the slaves who are to serve the wards, the income of the latter, as well as the expenses of their clothing and lodging; and the age of those to whom maintenance is granted should also be taken into consideration. 3Still, in the case of large estates, not the entire value of the same, but what will be sufficient to enable the ward to live in an economical manner, should regulate the measure of the allowance. 4Where, however, the guardian, and he who desires an allowance for his support to be made do not agree as to the means of the latter, an inquiry should be instituted, and maintenance should not be rashly granted, lest injustice be done to one or the other of the parties. First, however, the Prætor should require the guardian to disclose how much is in his hands, and warn him that he will be compelled to pay a high rate of interest on all that is in excess of the sum mentioned in this statement. 5The Prætor is also accustomed to allow a certain sum for the education of male and female wards, or minors, who are under twenty years of age; this to be regulated by the amount of their means, and the age of those who are to receive instruction. 6Where, however, the wards are poor, the guardian is not compelled to support them out of his own property, and if a ward should be reduced to want after maintenance has been allowed him, the latter should be diminished, just as it is customary to increase it, when the estate has been enhanced in value.
Dig. 27,10,6Ulpianus libro primo de omnibus tribunalibus. Observare praetorem oportebit, ne cui temere citra causae cognitionem plenissimum curatorem det, quoniam plerique vel furorem vel dementiam fingunt, quo magis curatore accepto onera civilia detrectent.
Ulpianus, On All Tribunals, Book I. The Prætor must be careful not to appoint a curator rashly and without the most thorough investigation of the case, since many persons feign madness or insanity in order that, by the appointment of a curator, they may the more readily evade their civil obligations.