Page:An introduction to Roman-Dutch law.djvu/101

 Rh GUARDIANSHIP 61 heirs ^ against the ward and his heirs to be indemnified for expenses ^ and to recover a reasonable recompense for his time and trouble.^ In the Civil Law these actions only lay after the termina- tion of the guardianship,* but in the modern law they may be brought, when necessary, also during its continuance.^ The statement made above that each tutor is liable in Extent solidum must be understood subject to the law as to the '^^^^' benefit of excussion and the benefit of division. Where liability. one tutor alone has acted he must be sued before the rest, who otherwise can plead the beneficium excussionis. Where more than one tutor have acted, any one of the acting tutors may be sued, but by pleading the beneficium divisionis he can divide his liability with the other tutors who were solvent at the earliest time at which the pupil could properly have sued. Where different duties of administration have been assigned by the testator, or the judicial authority, between various tutors, each is, gener- ally speaking, liable only for his own particular sphere of duty.^ In addition to the above actions the Civil Law gave other ac- various other remedies or securities to the minor, more ^o^an particularly: (1) the action 'rationibus distrahendis ' ; ' Law. (2) an action against the magistrate by whom the guardian has been appointed ; * (3) the crimen suspecti ^ for the Voet, 27. 4. 2. ^ yoet, 27. 4. 3-6. ' V. d. L. 1. 5. 6. In the Civil Law the office of tutor was unpaid. Dig. 26. 7. 33. 3. In R.-D. L. a reasonable remuneration was allowed except to parents. Gr. 1. 9. 11 ; Voet, 27. 4. 12. The amount was usually fixed by local statutes. V. d. K. Th. 156. ' Groen. de leg. abr. ad Dig. 27. 3. 4. « Van Leeuwen, 1. 16. 12 ; Voet, 27. 8. 6. ' With regard to losses occasioned by omissions, all the guardians are liable in solidum, and though they may claim the benefit of division as between themselves, are not entitled to the benefit of excussion. 1 Maasdorp, p. 259 ; Nie- kerk v. Niekerk (1830) 1 Menz. 452. ' Dig. 27. 3.1. 9; 27.3.2. ^ Dig. 27. 8. 1. This action was given by a S. C. of the time of Trajan. Cod. 5. 75. 5. " Inst. lib. l,tit. 26 : Sciendum est suspecti crimen e lege duodecim tabularum descendere.
 * Dig. 27. 3. 4, pr. and 27. 4. 1. 3.