PECULIUM

The restrictions on ownership of property by persons alieni iuris led to practical problems. A person might be of middle years, and might hold high public office, but still be subject to the potestas of another.

In origin, the peculium would simply have been a matter of social practice. In law, all property acquired by a child in power or by a slave belonged in law to the paterfamilias or master respectively, subject to the exceptions discussed above for children in power. Actions in respect of a peculium had to be brought by or against the paterfamilias or master. It might have been satisfactory in the small agrarian community that was early Rome for the paterfamilias to have absolute control of the household’s property, particu­larly given that comparatively short life expectancy would mean that one would normally be released from potestas at a fairly young age. This was hardly practical, however, in a major commercial city. And there would always have been long-lived individuals keeping their children in potestas into middle age. Some legal recognition for the institution ofpeculium came through praetorian intervention. The praetor introduced actions making it possible to sue the master or paterfamilias for the acts of the slave or child in power, though this was restricted to the value of the peculium plus any benefit derived by the master or paterfamilias from the peculium. In addition, the master or paterfamilias could be held liable where he had authorised the acts in question or for debts incurred in the course of a business that the son or slave had been appointed to manage.