Question — Decretum of Gratian
Question VIII
GRATIAN. Part I. Concerning accusations, how they ought to be made is openly determined in the canons. For Pope Callistus says, [to the Bishops of Gaul, letter II]:
GRATIANUS. I. Pars. De accusationibus uero, qualiter fieri debeat in canonibus aperte discernitur. Ait enim Calixtus Papa: [ad Episcopos Galliae, ep. II.]
Friedberg, col. 503/504
C. I. An accusation shall always be made in writing.
The persons of accusers shall never be received without a writing, nor shall any persons be permitted to accuse while the person whom they wish to accuse is absent.
C. I. Accusatio semper fiat in scriptis.
Accusatorum personae sine scripto numquam recipiantur nec absente eo, quem accusare uoluerint, quibuslibet accusare permittatur.
Friedberg, col. 503/504
[C. II.]
From book IV of the Code, under the title On Proofs, [final law]. Let all accusers know that they ought to bring into public cognizance a matter which is fortified by suitable witnesses, instructed by the clearest documentary proofs, or furnished with indications which are undoubted for proof and clearer than light.
[C. II.]
Codice libro IV. titulo De probationibus. [l. fin.] Sciant cuncti accusatores, eam rem se deferre debere in publicam notionem, que munita sit testibus idoneis, uel instructa apertissimis documentis, uel indiciis ad probationem indubitatis et luce clarioribus expedita.
Friedberg, col. 503/504
C. III. An accusation ought always to be made in writing.
Likewise Pope Eutychian, [to the Bishops of Sicily, letter II]. Whoever he is who alleges a crime, let him come into judgment, indicate the name of the defendant, undertake the bond of formal inscription, and submit to a corresponding custody—with an appraisal of dignity nevertheless maintained. Let him know that he has no license to lie, since the likeness of the punishment calls calumniators to vengeance. But those who have recourse to diviners and magicians shall by no means be admitted to an accusation.
C. III. Accusatio semper debet fieri in scriptis.
Item Euticianus Papa. [Episcopis Siciliae, ep. II.] Quisquis ille est, qui crimen intendit, in iudicium ueniat, nomen rei indicet, uinculum inscriptionis arripiat, custodiae similitudinem (habita tamen dignitatis estimatione) potiatur, nec sibi nouerit licentiam mentiendi, cum calumpniantes ad uindictam poscat similitudo suplicii. Qui uero ad sortilegos magosque concurrunt, nullatenus ad accusationem sunt admittendi.
Friedberg, col. 503/504
C. IV. Concerning the same.
Likewise Pope Sixtus III, [in the letter to the Eastern Bishops, c. 4]. One who alleges a crime shall write that he will prove it. And one who has not proved what he alleged shall himself suffer the punishment which he sought to inflict. But Pope Stephen appears to write to the contrary, saying, [letter II, c. 4]:
C. IV. De eodem.
Item Sixtus Papa. [III. in epist. ad Episcopos orientales, cap. 4.] Qui crimen obicit, scribat se probaturum. Et qui non probauerit quod obiecit, penam, quam intulerit, ipse patiatur. Sed Stephanus Papa contra uidetur scribere, dicens: [ep. II. c. 4.]
Friedberg, col. 503/504
C. V. Concerning the same.
No person's accusation shall be received through writings, but by his own voice—if the person of the accuser is lawful and worthy—with, of course, the person whom he desires to accuse present, because no one can accuse while absent or be accused by an absent person. GRATIAN. But Pope Callistus prescribed that, with the person whom he accuses present, an accuser shall offer his accusation to the judge in writing and read the letters of his accusation in his own voice. Stephen, however, prohibits an absent person from daring to accuse anyone by a letter.
GRATIAN. Part II. § 1. But what the form of an accusation is and what the method of composing petitions is, Paul shows in the Digest, in the book On Public Judgments, under the title On Accusations and Formal Inscriptions, [law 3], saying: § 2. “The composition of petitions of formal inscription is as follows: the consul and the day. Before that praetor or consul, Lucius Titius declared that he was denouncing Maeva as a defendant under the Julian Law on Adulteries because he says that she committed adultery with Gaius Seius in the city N., in that man's house, in the month N., when N. were consuls. For both the place in which the adultery was committed and the person with whom it is said to have been admitted, and the month, are certainly to be designated. This is provided by the Julian Law on Public Judgments and is generally prescribed for all who denounce anyone as a defendant. But they shall not be compelled unwillingly to include either the day or the hour. But if the petitions of formal inscription have not been lawfully arranged, the name of the defendant is erased and the power to prosecute the defendant anew will arise. § 3. Likewise, the person who gives the petition ought to subscribe that he has made the declaration, or another for him if he does not know letters. But if he alleges another crime—for example, that the person provided his own house so that a matron might suffer illicit intercourse, that he released an adulterer who had been caught, that he received a price for discovered illicit intercourse, or anything similar—that very thing will have to be included in the petition. If the accuser has died or another cause has impeded him so that he cannot accuse, or anything similar has occurred, the name of the defendant is erased upon the defendant's petition. This is also provided by the Julian Law on Violence and by a decree of the Senate, in such a manner that another is permitted to prosecute the defendant anew. But within what time, we shall consider; and indeed thirty available days are to be observed.”
C. V. De eodem.
Per scripta nullius accusatio suscipiatur, sed propria uoce (si legitima et condigna accusatoris persona fuerit) presente uidelicet eo, quem accusare desiderat, quia nullum absens accusare potest, nec ab aliquo accusari. Gratian. Sed Calixtus Papa precepit, ut accusator presente eo, quem accusat, in scriptis accusationem iudici offerat, et propria uoce litteras suae accusationis legat. Stephanus autem prohibet, ne absens aliquem per epistolam accusare audeat. II. Pars. §. 1. Que uero sit forma accusationis, quis modus concipiendorum libellorum, Paulus in Digestis, libro de publicis iudiciis, titulo de accusationibus et inscriptionibus, [lege 3.] ostendit, dicens: §. 2. "Libellorum inscriptionis conceptio talis est: Consul et dies. Apud illum pretorem uel consulem Lucius Titius professus est, se Meuiam lege Iulia de adulteriis ream deferre quod dicat eam cum Gaio Seio in ciuitate N, domo illius, mense N, consulibus N, commisisse adulterium. Utique enim et locus designandus est, in quo adulterium commissum est, et persona, cum qua admissum dicitur, et mensis. Hoc enim lege Iulia publicorum cauetur, et generaliter precipitur omnibus, qui aliquem reum deferunt. Neque autem diem, neque horam inuitus conprehendant. Quod si libelli inscriptionum legitime ordinati non fuerint, rei nomen aboletur, et ex integro repetendi reum potestas fiet. §. 3. Item subscribere debebit is, qui dat libellum, se professum esse, uel alius pro eo, si litteras nesciat. Sed si aliud crimen obiciat, ueluti quod domum suam prebuit, ut stuprum materfamilias pateretur, quod adulterum deprehensum dimiserit, quod pretium pro conperto stupro acceperit, et si quid simile, id ipsum libello conprehendendum erit. Si accusator decesserit, aliaue causa eum inpedierit, quo minus accusare possit, et si quid simile, nomen rei aboletur postulante reo, idque et lege Iulia de ui, et senatusconsulto cautum est, ita ut liceat alii ex integro repetere reum. Sed intra quod tempus, uidebimus; et utique XXX. dies utiles obseruandi sunt."
Friedberg, col. 503/504