ACTIO DE PE CULIO.

We have seen that the actio de in rem verso was one with the actio de peculio; i.e. that a creditor suing on a slave's contract could claim to be paid out of what had been devoted to the purposes of the master, and, if that did not suffice, out of the peculium of the slave in question. The actio de peculio can, however, be treated as an independent action of which we can now state, by way of preliminary, the general principles. We know that the dominus is liable so far as the peculium will go, upon the slave's negotia, that the action is based on the Edict, and that, in point of form, an important characteristic is that the formula contains, probably in the condemnatio, a limitation or taxatio, in the words dumtaxat de peculio, or the like.

The liability is in a sense not of the master but of the peculium. Though, in view of legacies of it, the term peculium must have already had a legal meaning, there can be no doubt that the introduction of this action gave precision to the conception, since the liability is based on the existence and independence of the peculium. The practical meaning of this proposition is that it is essential to the claim that there be a peculium: if there be none there is no action. It does not depend on voluntas domini, and thus it is not barred by the master's prohibition to trade, or by the fact that he is a pupillus.