teneri; idem dicitur et si propter infirmitatem sustinere mularum impetum non potuerit: nec videtur iniquum, si infirmitas culpae adnumeratur, cum affectare quisque non debeat, in quo vel intelligit vel intelligere debet infirmitatem suam alii periculosam futuram. Idem iuris est in personam eius, qui impetum equi, quo vehebatur, propter imperitiam vel infirmitatem retinere non potuerit. 1. 8, § 1, D. h. t.' Proculus ait, si medicus servum imperite secuerit, vel ex locato vel ex lege Aquilia competere actionem.-Idem iuris est si medicamento perperam usus fuerit; sed et qui bene secuerit et dereliquit curationem, . . . culpae reus intelligitur.-1. 7, § 8, 1. 8 pr. eod. The lex Aquilia was limited to cases of immediate injury to a thing induced by physical influence or destruction (damnum corpore corpori datum); but later on the actio legis Aquiliae was given in analogous cases of injury to property," as utilis or in factum actio. Gai. iii. § 219: Et placuit ita demum ex ista lege actionem esse, si quis corpore suo damnum dederit; ideoque alio modo damno dato, utiles actiones dantur: veluti si quis alienum hominem aut pecudem incluserit; et fame necaverit, aut 1 It is commonly said that the mule-driver who through want of skill has been unable to hold in the mules, if they have overrun the slave of another man, is liable on the score of negligence. The same is said also if he has been unable to manage the pace of the mules from lack of strength. And it does not appear unfair, if weakness is accounted a fault, for one ought not to engage where he either perceives or ought to perceive that his weakness will endanger another. The same holds in respect of him who from unskilfulness or weakness has been unable to hold in a horse upon which he was riding. 2 Proc. says, if a surgeon has unskilfully bled a slave, an act is available either upon the hire or as grounded upon the l. Aquilia.—The same holds, if he has badly applied his drugs; but even he who has bled well, and has omitted further treatment, . . . is held guilty of negligence. iumentum tam vehementer egerit, ut rum Ulp. Celsus multum interesse dicit, occiderit an mortis causam praestiterit, ut, qui mortis causam praestitit non Aquilia, sed in factum actione teneatur; unde adfert eum, qui venenum pro medicamento dedit, et ait causam mortis praestitisse.-1. 7, § 6, h. t." Id. Celsus quaerit, si lolium aut avenam in segetem alienam inieceris, . . . in factum agendum . . .: nam alia quaedam species damni est ipsum quid corrumpere et mutare, ut lex Aquilia locum habeat, alia nulla ipsius mutatione applicare aliud, cuius molesta separatio sit.-Item si quis frumento arenam vel aliud quid immiscuit, ut difficilis separatio sit, quasi de corrupto agi poterit. -1. 27, §§ 14, 20 eod.3 Sed si non corpore damnum fuerit datum, neque corpus laesum fuerit, sed alio modo damnum alicui contigit, . . . placuit eum, qui obnoxius 1 And it was decided that the action grounded upon that statute only lies if a man has done damage by his own body; and so, if the damage was inflicted in any other way, equitable actions are given; as for instance, if a person has shut up another's slave or cattle and caused it to die of starvation, or has driven a beast of burden so violently as to have brought it down. 2 Cels. says it makes a great difference whether one has killed a man or has caused his death, because he who has caused death is not liable by the Aquilian action but by that on the case. Whence he gives as example a man who has given poison for medicine, and says he has caused death. Cels. says, if you have cast darnel or wild oats among the crop of another man, . . . proceedings must be taken on the case . . .; for that which comes of anything being itself spoilt and changed so that the l. Aquilia is applicable is one kind of damage, whilst the addition, without change of the thing, of something else, separation of which is difficult, is another kind. -Likewise if a mau has mixed sand or something else with wheat so that the separation is difficult, proceedings can be taken as for corruption. BOOK III. Pt. I. Ch. II. a Cf. Holmes, ubi sup. ; Ste phen, l. c. pp. 39-41. fuerit, in factum actione teneri: veluti si quis misericordia ductus alienum servum compedituni solverit, ut fugeret.—§ ult. I. h. t.1 Paul. Si quis alienum vinum vel frumentum consumpserit, non videtur damnum iniuria dare ideoque utilis danda est actio.-1. 30, § 2, D. h. t.2 Id. In damnis, quae lege Aquilia non tenentur, in factum datur actio-1. 33, § 1 eod. § 134. INIURIA.a INIURIA in the narrower sense is every intentional * Cf. D. 47, 10, and illegal violation of honour, i.e., the whole personality of another.d I pr. Generaliter iniuria dicitur omne quod non iure fit: specialiter alias contumelia, quae a contemnendo dicta est, . . . alias culpa, .. sicut lege Aquilia damnum iniuria accipitur, alias iniquitas vel iniustitia. pr. I. h. t. (de iniur. 4, 4).* Ulp. iniuria ex affectu facientis consistit. -Itaque pati quis iniuriam, etiamsi non sentiat, potest; facere nemo, nisi qui scit se iniuriam facere, etiamsi nesciat, cui faciat.-1. 3, §§ 1, 2, D. h. t. (de iniur. 47, 10). 1 But if no damage has been inflicted, nor a body injured by a physical act, but the damage happens in some other way. it has been held that he who has been in fault is liable to an action upon the case; for example, if a man moved by sympathy has released another man's slave from his fetters, so that he might make his escape. 2 If a man has consumed wine or corn belonging to another, he is not regarded as doing wrongful damage, and so an analogous action is to be given. 3 In respect of damage not comprised by the 1. Aquilia an action is given upon the case. ... In general everything is called iniuria which happens wrongfully; in a special sense, sometimes contumely, insult, which is derived from contemnere . . . at other times culpability. . . as in the l. Aquilia damage is taken as iniuria, at other times iniquity and injustice. Therefore any 5 -Iniuria lies in the will of the agent. This may be committed by insulting oral or written words or signs (so-called verbal and symbolic injuries), by deeds (so-called real injuries), by slander, and speeches and acts which cast suspicion upon, or are prejudicial to, the social or pecuniary position of any one, or other acts interfering with the right of personality. Id. Iniuriam autem fieri Labeo ait aut re aut verbis; re, quotiens manus inferuntur; verbis. autem, quotiens non manus inferuntur, sed convicium fit.—l. 1, § I eod.' Gai. iii. § 220: Iniuria autem committitur non solum cum quis pugno puta aut fuste percussus vel etiam verberatus erit, sed et si cui convicium factum fuerit sive quis bona alicuius quasi debitoris, sciens eum nihil sibi debere, proscripserit, sive quis ad infamiam alicuius libellum aut carmen scripserit, sive matrem familias aut praetextatum adsectatus fuerit, et denique aliis pluribus modis.2 in Ulp. Si quis virgines appellasset, one can suffer an iniuria, even if he feel it not; no one can commit an iniuria without knowing that he commits it, even if he know not against whom he commits it. 1 Now Labeo says that iniuria happens either by act or by words; by act, when hands are applied; but by words, when hands are not applied, but insult is committed. 2 Now an outrage is committed not only when a man shall be struck with the fist, say, or with a club, or even flogged, but also if abusive language has been used to one, or when a person knowing that some one, who he pretends is his debtor, owes him nothing has advertised his goods for sale, or when any one shall write a libel or a song defamatory of another or shall follow about a married woman or a lad, and, in short, in many other ways. ... If a man should have addressed virgins, . . . he is liable for outrage. It is one thing to address, another to follow about; BOOK III. Pt. I. Ch. II. Gai. Si creditor meus, cui paratus sum solvere, in iniuriam meam fideiussores meos interpellaverit, iniuriarum tenetur.-1. 19 eod.' Ulp. Si quis me prohibeat in mare piscari, sunt qui putent iniuriarum me posse agere; et plerique esse huic similem eum, qui in publicum lavare, vel in cavea publica sedere, vel in quo alio loco agere sedere conversari non patiatur, aut si quis re mea uti me non permittat: nam et hic iniuriarum conveniri potest.-1. 13, § 7 eod.3 It may have been done to the injured party directly or indirectly, i.e., in the person of those 'qui vel potestati eius vel affectui subiecti sunt.' Gai. iii. §§ 221-222: Pati autem iniuriam videmur non solum per nosmet ipsos, sed etiam per liberos nostros quos in potestate habemus, item per uxores nostras, quamvis in manu nostra non sint itaque si filiae meae, quae Titio nupta est, iniuriam feceris, non solum filiae nomine tecum agi iniuriarum potest, verum etiam meo quoque et Titii nomine.-Servo autem ipsi quidem nulla iniuria intelligitur fieri, sed domino per eum fieri videtur: non tamen iisdem modis, quibus etiam per liberos nostros vel uxores iniuriam pati videmur, sed ita cum quid atrocius commissum fuerit, quod aperte in contumeliam domini fieri videtur, veluti si quis alienum servum verberaverit.3 : for he addresses who by speech tempts modesty he follows about who continually follows without speaking; for a constant following also works a kind of outrage. If my creditor whom I am prepared to pay, has resorted to my sureties, in order to wrong me, he is liable for injuries. 2 If a man prevents my fishing in the sea, some are of opinion that I can take proceedings for injuries; . . . and most that he is like the man who does not allow one to wash in public, or sit in a public seat in a theatre, or to loiter, sit and pass one's life in any other place, or if a man does not allow us to use our own property: for he also can be sued for injuries. 3 We are looked upon as suffering injury not merely in our |