deterior fit patriæ causa, cui is, qui captus est, ni liberetur, jam periisse censendus est. VIII. Promittunt et nonnulli non fugere: tenet hoc eos, etiamsi vincti promiserint, contra quam quidam sentiunt. Nam et sic solet aut vita servari, aut mitior obtineri custodia. Si vero vinctus sit postea, ita demum liber erit, si ideo promiserit, ne vinciretur. IX. Satis inepte quæritur, an, qui captus est, alii dedere se possit. Nimis enim certum est, neminem sua pactione jus alteri quæsitum adimere posse. Est autem captori jus quæsitum, aut ipso belli jure, aut partim belli jure, partim concessu ejus qui bellum gerit, secundum ea quæ supra expo- Lib. iii. 6. suimus. § 23, ei segg. X. Circa effectus pactorum egregia quæstio est, an privati, si in fide præstanda negligentes sint, a suis potestatibus cogendi sint eam implere. Et cogendos verius est in bello duntaxat solenni, ob jus gentium, quo bellum gerentes obstringuntur alter alteri jus reddere, etiam de factis privatorum, ut puta si a privatis violati essent hostium legati. Sic Cornelius Nepos, recitante Gellio, scripserat multis in senatu placuisse, Noct. Alt. caris. J. B.] c In senatu placuisse] Idem jam ante senatus redire eos coegerat, quos Pyr rhus sub conditione dimiserat. Appi- they promised; contrary to the opinion of some moralists. For in this way, men's lives are saved, and their captivity made less harsh. If, however, a person, having made such a promise, is afterwards put in chains, he will be liberated from his promise, if he made it to avoid being put in chains. IX. A question is raised, idly enough, whether he who is captured can surrender himself to another than the captor. For it is abundantly certain that no one can by a compact of his take away a right from another. And the captor has already acquired a right, either by the right of war, or partly by the right of war, partly by the concession of the superior authority which makes the war; as we have explained above. X. With regard to the effects of compacts, there is a noted question, whether private persons, if they are negligent in fulfilling their engagements, can be compelled by their own authorities. And the sounder opinion is, that they are compellable only in a regular war, on account of the Law of Nations, by which the belligerents are bound to fulfil the rules of justice to each other, even with regard to the acts of private persons; as for instance, if ambassadors had been vii. 18. Lib. i 16. §2. § 26. ut ii de decem captivis, qui redire nollent, datis custodibus ad Hannibalem deducerentur. XI. De interpretatione tenendæ regulæ jam aliquoties Hoc lib. c. 20. memoratæ, ut a proprietate verborum non recedatur, nisi absurdi vitandi causa, aut ex alia satis certa mentis conjectura: ut in dubio magis interpretemur verba contra eum, qui legem dedit. XII. Vitam pactus non etiam ad libertatem jus habet. Vestium nomine arma non veniunt: sunt enim hæc diversa. Venisse auxilium recte dicitur si sit in conspectu, etiamsi nihil agat: nam ipsa præsentia suam vim habet. XIII. At rediisse ad hostem non dicetur qui clam rediit ut statim exiret: rediisse enim ita intelligendi debet, ut in potestate hostium iterum sit. Contraria interpretatio veteraDe Off. ii. 32. toria Ciceroni, stulte callida, quæ fraudem in se et perjurium Justa auxilia in pactis deditionis] Gotthicorum Procopii. (Cap. 7. 12. 30. Sunt ejus pacti exempla quatuor in 111. 37.) Aliud de Luca apud Agathiam violated by private persons. So Cornelius Nepos, as Gellius informs us, had written, that many of the senators were of opinion, that those of the ten captives who were unwilling to return, should be sent to Hannibal under guard. XI. With regard to Interpretation, the rules are to be observed in this case also, which we have several times mentioned; that we are not to recede from the propriety of the words, except in order to avoid an absurdity, or for some other good probable reason: that in a doubtful case we are rather to interpret the words against him who gave the law and the like. : XII. He who has covenanted for his life, has not a right to his liberty also. Under the name of clothes, arms are not included: for they are different in kind. Aid is said to have arrived, if it be in sight, though it be doing nothing; for the presence of it has an efficacy. XIII. But he cannot be said to have returned to the enemy according to his promise, who returned secretly in order to go away again immediately: for he was to be understood to mean by return, that he was again to be in the power of the enemy. The contrary quibbling interpretation is called by Cicero silly cunning, involving fraud and perjury. And this interpretation is called by Gellius a fraudulent cunning; and those who had employed it were noted as ignominious by the censor, and made incapable of giving evidence, and disreputable. XIV. When an agreement is made for surrendering a city except habeat. Eadem Gellio fraudulenta calliditas, a Censore igno- Lib. vii. 18. miniis notata, qui eam adhibuerant, intestabiles et invisi. d XIV. Justa auxilia in pactis deditionis non faciendæ, si ea advenerint, intelligi debent talia quæ periculum cessare faciant. XV. Notandum et hoc, si quid de executionis modo convenit, id conditionem non injicere pacto, ut si dictum certo loco solvi, qui locus postea dominum mutaverit. § 53. XVI. De obsidibus tenendum quod supra diximus, ple- Hoc lib. c. 20. rumque eos accessionem esse principalis actus: sed tamen conveniri etiam posse ut disjunctiva sit obligatio, nimirum ut aut fiat aliquid, aut obsides retineantur. Sed in dubio tenendum est illud, quod maxime est naturale, id est, ut accessio tantum credantur. Lib. I. (c. 7.) De Castello Corsica apud Bizarum Historia Genuensis x. alia libro XVIII. et in bello in Mauros. proper aid arrive, such aid is to be understood as makes the danger cease. XV. This also is to be noted, that if any covenant is made as to the mode of executing the convention, that does not become a condition of the agreement: as, if it were said that it is to be discharged in a certain place, which place afterwards changes its master. XVI. With regard to Hostages, what we have said above is to be observed, that in general, they are accessories to the principal act: but it may be covenanted that the obligation shall be disjunctive; that either something shall be done, or the hostages retained. But in a doubtful case, we must hold to the most natural supposition, that they are only accessories. L. ea lege. 51. I. D. locali. CAPUT XXIV. DE FIDE TACITA. I. Tacite quomodo fides interpo natur. II. Exemplum in eo qui in tute- III. Qui colloquium postulat aut IV. Huic tamen, du... collocutori SILENT non noceat, integrum esse res suas promovere. V. De mutis signis ex consuetudine aliquid significantibus. VI. De tacita approbatione spon sionis. VII. Pœna quando tacite remissa. ILENTIO quædam conveniri non male a Javoleno dictum est, quod et in publicis, et in privatis, et in mixtis conventionibus usu venit. Causa hæc est, quod consensus, qualitercunque indicatus et acceptatus, vim habet juris transferendi. Signa autem consensus sunt et alia præter voces et Lib. ii. 4.38 literas, ut non semel jam indicavimus. Quædam natura insunt actui. 4, 5; iii. 1. § 8. II. Exemplum sit in eo qui aut ab hostibus, aut ab externis veniens in alterius populi, aut regis fidem se dat: nam hic quin tacite se obliget, ne quid faciat adversus eum statum in quo præsidium petit, dubitari non debet. Quare sequendi non sunt qui Zopyri factum a reprehensione remotum aiunt: neque enim fides ejus in regem, perfidiam in eos ad quos con CHAPTER XXIV. Of Tacit Faith. I. It is well said by Javolenus, that some things are agreed upon in silence. This happens in public conventions, and in private, and in mixed. The cause is this; that consent, however indicated and accepted, has the force of transferring right. But there are other signs of consent, besides words and letters, as we have more than once indicated. II. Some are by nature inherent in certain acts. For an example, take him who coming from the enemy, or from strangers, gives himself into the hands of another people or king. For that such a person tacitly binds himself not to do anything against that state in which he seeks refuge, cannot be doubted. Wherefore they are not to be followed, who say that the act of Zopyrus was free from blame: for his fidelity to his king does not excuse his perfidy towards those to whom he fled. The same must be said of Sextus; the same of Tarquin who went over to Gabii. Virgil speaks of Sinon's treachery and crime. fugerat excusat. Idem de Sexto Tarquinii filio, qui ad Gabios Liv. i. 53, se contulerat, dictum esto. De Sinone Virgilius : Accipe nunc Danaum insidias, et crimine ab uno III. Sic et qui colloquium aut postulat, aut admittit, atacite pollicetur, collocutoribus id innoxium fore. Hostibus En. ii. v. 65. 25. n. 3. per colloquii speciem violandis jus gentium violari pronuntiat Livius addit, colloquium perfide violatum: nam per fidem Lib. xxxviii. mendose eo loco scribitur. Cn. Domitius eo quod Bituitum regem Arvernorum per colloquii simulationem accersitum, hospitioque exceptum vinxit, hoc a Valerio Maximo judicium Lib. ix. 6. refert: Nimia gloriæ cupiditas perfidum existere coëgit. Quamobrem mirari subit, cur scriptor libri octavi belli Gallici cap. 23. Cæsaris, sive is Hirtius est, sive Oppius, simile factum T. Labieni referens, adjecerit, infidelitatem ejus (Comii scilicet) sine ulla perfidia judicavit comprimi posse; nisi hoc Labieni magis quam scriptoris judicium est. IV. At non ultra tacita illa voluntas trahenda est quam dixi: nam dum collocutores nihil patiantur, specie colloquii avertere hostem a belli consiliis, sua interim promovere, perfidia vacat, et dolis bonis annumeratur: quare qui deceptum spe a Tacite pollicetur collocutoribus id innoxium fore] Merito Agathias Ragnarim Hunnum culpat, quod abeuntem a colloquio Narsetem telo transfigere III So he who either asks for or grants a parley, tacitly promises that it shall be without damage to the parties parleying. When enemies are harmed under pretence of a colloquy, Livy says that the law of nations is violated: adding, Colloquium perfide violatum. So Valerius Maximus, of Cn. Domitius, who had drawn in Bituitus, king of the Arverni, under pretence of a colloquy, and had then thrown him into chains: Too great greediness of glory made him perfidious. And hence we must wonder why the writer of the eighth Book of Cesar's Gallic War, whether it be Hirtius or Oppius, relating a similar act of Labienus, adds: He judged, that his (Comius's) faithlessness might be suppressed without perfidy; except we are to look upon this as the judgment of Labienus, not of the writer. IV. But this tacit will [or promise] is not to be drawn beyond the limits which I have stated: for provided the collocutors suffer no harm, to turn away the enemy from warlike measures by the appearance of a colloquy, and in the mean time to push on our own designs, has no perfidy in it, and is reckoned among good stratagems. And thus 26 [GROT. III.] |