Ulpianus, on Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. Anyone who becomes insane is considered to retain the position and rank he previously held, and also his magistracy and authority; just as he retains the ownership of his property.

Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. Barbarus Philippus, a fugitive slave, sought the prætorship of Rome, and was appointed Prætor. Pomponius is of the opinion that his condition as a slave was no obstacle to his holding the office of Prætor. It is true that he performed the duties of that office, still, let us consider the case of a slave having kept his condition secret for a long time, while he discharged his duty as Prætor. Will all that he decided or decreed be of no force or effect? What shall We say? Or will it be valid on account of the welfare of those who instituted proceedings before him either under the law, or by virtue of some other legal right? Indeed, I think that none of these things should be rejected; for this is the more humane view to take, since the Roman people had the power to invest a slave with this authority, and if they had known that he was such they would have granted him his freedom. Much more must this right be considered well founded with respect to the Emperor.

Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. It is true that a guardian can be appointed for minors who are dumb, and have not arrived at puberty. But may it not be doubted whether they can be authorized by their guardian? If the guardian can authorize a ward who is silent, he can also authorize one who is dumb. It is, however, perfectly true (as Julianus states in the Twenty-first Book of the Digest), that the guardian can authorize his ward to act even if he is silent. 1It is settled that a guardian cannot be appointed conditionally by the Governor of a province, and if one should be appointed, his appointment will be of no effect. This is also the opinion of Pomponius. But if a Governor makes the appointment in the following terms: “I appoint such-and-such a man guardian, if he gives security”; this appointment does not contain a condition, but a warning that the guardlianship will not be conferred upon him unless he furnishes security; that is to say, he will not be allowed to transact the business of his office without giving a bond to insure the preservation of the property. 2The appointment of a guardian is not an Imperial privilege, nor one attaching to magisterial jurisdiction, but only belongs to him upon whom the right has been conferred by the law, or by a Decree of the Senate, or by the Emperor himself. 3A guardian can be appointed for a minor who is deaf. 4It is clear that a guardian cannot be appointed for a minor whose father is in the hands of the enemy. If, however, one should be appointed, it may be asked whether or not the appointment may not remain in suspense. I do not think that such an appointment is valid, for, after the return of the father, the minor will again come under his control, just as if his father had never been captured by the enemy. Still, a curator should be appointed for the management of the property to prevent it from being lost in the meantime.

The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. Where a guardian is not captured by the enemy, but is sent in the capacity of ambassador, whether he is received or deserts, for the reason that he does not become a slave, he still remains a guardian, but, in the meantime, another guardian will be appointed by the Governor.

The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. A guardian cannot be appointed by will for the management of certain affairs, without including the administration of property.

Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. Where, however, a guardian is appointed for property which is situated in Africa or Syria, the appointment will be valid, for this is our practice.

The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. Legal guardianship, which is granted to patrons by the Law of the Twelve Tables, is not, indeed, granted expressly or specifically, but as the result of the right of succession conferred upon patrons by this same law. 1Therefore a man who has manumitted a slave becomes a guardian by the Law of the Twelve Tables, whether he acted voluntarily, or whether he manumitted him, having been obliged to do so by the terms of a trust. 2But even if he purchased a slave for the purpose of manumitting him, under this law, and by virtue of a Constitution of the Divine Marcus, addressed to Ofilius Victorinus, he should obtain his freedom, he must be held to be the guardian of said slave. 3It is evident that if a slave should obtain his freedom in accordance with the Rubrian Decree of the Senate, he will not have as guardian the person charged with his manumission, but, having been liberated by the will of his master, he will belong to the family of the latter. In this instance, the guardianship which does not belong to the patron will belong to the children of the latter. This rule applies to all freedmen manumitted by will. 4Where two or more persons manumit a slave, all become his guardians. If, however, a woman should be among those who manumitted him, it must be held that the males alone will be his guardians. 5Where one of several patrons dies, the guardianship remains with the survivors, even though the deceased may have left a son. If, however, a patron is taken by the enemy, his fellow-patrons remain sole guardians until he is released. In like manner, if one of them is reduced to slavery, it is evident that the others remain guardians. 6If, however, all of the patrons should die, the guardianship will then vest in their children. 7Hence, if one of two patrons leaves a son, and the other a grandson, shall the guardianship vest in the son alone, or also in the grandson, for the reason that the latter is the next of kin in the family of his father? This point should be settled in accordance with the rule governing legal inheritances, for a legal inheritance belongs to the son alone, and therefore the guardianship descends to the son alone, and after the son to the grandson. 8It may be asked whether the guardianship should be granted to the grandson, where the son of the patron is either removed or excused from serving. Marcellus states that he is of the opinion that the grandson cannot succeed, and therefore that he must be excluded from the guardianship, and another appointed in his stead, in order that succession may not be permitted in such cases. 9Succession should be permitted in legal guardianship not only where death occurs, but also where forfeiture of civil rights takes place. Wherefore, where the nearest relative loses his civil rights, he who is next in degree succeeds to the administration of the guardianship. 10Where a father emancipates his son or his daughter, his grandson or his granddaughter, or any other descendants under age whom he has subject to his authority, he occupies the place of their legal guardian.

The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXXVIII. The curatorship of an insane mother belongs to her son, for equal filial affection is due to both parents although their authority is not the same.

Ulpianus, On SoMnus, Book XXXVIII. It is established that a freedwoman is also included under the term “freedman.”