Question — Decretum of Gratian

Question VIII

English · Latin · Both

¶.

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]:

Friedberg, col. 503/504

1.

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.

Friedberg, col. 503/504

2.

[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.

Friedberg, col. 503/504

3.

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.

Friedberg, col. 503/504

4.

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]:

Friedberg, col. 503/504

5.

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.”

Friedberg, col. 503/504