In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

BOOKFOURTEEN THE ACTION AGAINST THE SHIPOWNER1 1 ULPIAN, Edict, book 28: Everyone acknowledges the practical value of this edict: Just as liability is imposed on the person who puts someone in to manage a shop or business, so it is only fair to impose liability on the person who appoints a ship's captain , since people who need to go by ship may not be aware of the standing or character of the man with whom they have to deal. Indeed, one's dealings with the captain of a ship may be more urgent than those with the manager of a business, since one can always check the standing of a business manager before dealing with him, whereas with a ship's captain there may not be information on the spot or enough time for full consideration. 1. By "ship's captain," we mean the person who is given charge of the whole ship. 2. Although the shipowner is liable for all the delicts of the sailors on board, he is not liable on contracts made with any member of the crew, contracts and delicts being different. A person permits his appointed captain to make contracts, but not the sailors he enlists, though he must see to it that the sailors behave carefully and honestly. 3. The captain is appointed to hire out the ship for the carriage of cargo, to take on passengers, or to purchase provisions or equipment; but even if he buys and sells cargoes, this will bind the shipowner if the captain was appointed for that purpose . 4. It is irrelevant what the status of a ship's captain may be, whether free or slave, or, if a slave, whether the shipowner's or someone else's; nor is his age relevant; for that is up to the person who appointed him. 5. "Ship's captain" includes not only a person appointed by the shipowner but also a person appointed by the captain himself . Julian said as much in a case where the shipowner was unaware of the subappointment . If the shipowner knows of the subappointment and allows the surrogate to join the captaincy, he is treated as having made the appointment himself. This seems to me to be the right view: I must stand by all the acts of the captain whom I myself have appointed; for otherwise those who deal with him would be let down. For practical reasons, this is accepted more readily in the case of a ship's captain than of a business manager. Suppose, however, that it was a term of the captain's appointment that he appoint no delegate. Should we followJulian here? Or suppose that the prohibition was specific: "Do not make Titius captain." Even so one must hold that the interests of those using the ship must prevail. 6. "Ship" includes any sea or river vessel, lake craft, or even a raft. 7. It is not for everything that the praetor grants an action against the shipowner, but only "on account of those matters" for which the captain was appointed, that is, only if the captain was appointed to deal with that sort of thing-for example, if he charters the ship to carry cargo or buys gear to be used on 1. The word exercitor, like the French armateur, designates the maritime entrepreneur , the person with the prime economicinterest in the ship's operations, the man who gives orders to the captain. The English language has no precise equivalent. In this translation the term normally used for such a person is "shipowner," notwithstanding that the exercitor may not in fact own the ship (and indeed cannot in law do so if he is a slave or son-in-power). To describe the activity of the exercitor the terms "manage" and "management" are used, and it has occasionally seemed fitting to use 416 BOOK FOURTEENIACTION AGAINST SHIPOWNER the voyage or contracts or pays for repairs to the ship or promises the sailors their wages. 8. Is the borrowing of money to be treated as "on account of those matters" for which he was appointed? If the money was borrowed for a purpose for which the captain was appointed, I agree with Pegasus that the action should lie; for he might well borrow money for the fitting out or equipment of the ship or for the maintenance of the crew. 9. Here Ofilius asks whether the shipowner should be held liable if the captain borrows money for the...

Share