17. WANTED PERSONS OR THOSE WHO MAY BE CONDEMNED IN THEIR ABSENCE
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

BOOK FORTY-EIGHT/ WANTED PERSONS 353 he had carried through the case to the end, the charges were annulled under an amnesty for accused persons. My question is: does he fall under the senatus consultum Turpillianum if he subsequently fails to accuse him again? Herennius Modestinus gave the opinion that an amnesty for accused persons, which is a public concession, does not relate to this type of charge. 18 PAPIRIUS JUSTUS,Constitutions, book 1: The Emperors Antoninus and Verus, Augusti , wrote in a rescript to Julius Verus, when he was alleged to have pursued a lawsuit for a fairly long time, that he could not accept an annulment against the wishes of his opponent. 1. They further wrote that unless there was clear proof of the opponent 's agreement, an annulment would not be granted. 2. They further wrote that although he alleged that an amendment had been applied for in a capital charge as though it were a pecuniary matter, nevertheless, the inquiry should be re-opened so that if he had not proved what he claimed, he should not go unpunished. WANTED PERSONS OR THOSE WHO MAY BE CONDEMNED IN THEIR ABSENCE 1 MARCIAN, Criminal [Proceedings], book 2: The deified Severus and Antoninus the Great wrote in a rescript that no one should be punished in his absence; and we apply this rule, that absent persons should not be condemned; for the argument of justice does not permit of a person's being condemned without his case being heard. 1. If, however, someone is to be punished more severely, say [by condemnation] to the opus metalli or something of the kind, or to a capital penalty, in this event the penalty should not be inflicted on an absent person, but the absent one should be searched for and registered [amongthe accused] so that he may take the opportunity [of defending] himself. 2. Provincial governors, however, as regards wanted persons who have been registered, must act as follows: They must order by edict those whom they have registered to attend, so that it may come to their notice that they have been registered ; and [the governors] must also send letters to the [local]magistrates where [the wanted persons] reside so that by their agency it can become known that the wanted men have been registered. 3. And the one-year period for them to clear themselves is reckoned from this time. 4. And Papinian, in the sixteenth book of his Replies, has written that if a wanted person who has been registered attends before the provincial governor within the year and gives satisfaction, there is no scope for orders that his property be forfeit to the imperial treasury. For if he were to die within the year, the charge against him expires and lapses, and his property passes to his successors. 2 MACER,Criminal [Proceedings], book 2: The period of one year applies to taking possession of the property of a wanted person who has been registered. 1. But if the imperial treasury fails to take possession of the property during the space of twenty years, it will thereafter be barred by prescription [from taking possession] either from the accused himself or from his heirs. 3 MARCIAN, Criminal Proceedings, book 2: For it was the wish of the deified emperors that any sort of dispute involving the imperial treasury, if there were no other specific prescription, should be barred by twenty years' silence. 4 MACER,Criminal Proceedings, book 2: The year is to be reckoned from the time when the registration which relates to the wanted man became public knowledge, BOOK FORTY-EIGHT /WANTED PERSONS 353 he had carried through the case to the end, the charges were annulled under an amnesty for accused persons. My question is: does he fall under the senatus consultum Turpillianum if he subsequently fails to accuse him again? Herennius Modestinus gave the opinion that an amnesty for accused persons, which is a public concession, does not relate to this type of charge. 18 PAPIRIUS JUSTUS, Constitutions, book 1: The Emperors Antoninus and Verus, Augusti , wrote in a rescript to Julius Verus, when he was alleged to have pursued a lawsuit for a fairly long time, that he could not accept an annulment against the wishes of his opponent. 1. They further wrote that unless there was clear proof of the opponent 's agreement, an annulment would not be granted. 2. They further wrote that although he alleged that an amendment had been applied...