Dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

64'2 INTERDICTUM. INTE RDICTUM.
his colleagues, which was the case in the matter of provided for by the Edict. If the defendant either
L. Scipio. [TRIBUNI.] admitted the plaintiff's case before the interdict
The term Intercessio and the verb intercedo was granted, and complied with its terms, or subalso applied to the tribunitian opposition to a roga- mitted to the interdict after it was granted, the
tio. (Liv. vi. 35; Cic. de Orat. ii. 47.) [G. L.] dispute was of course at an end. This is not
INTERCI/SI DIES. [DIES.] stated by Gains, but follows of necessity from tile
INTERCOLU'MNIA. [TEm.PLUM.] nature of the case; and when he goes on to say
INTERDI'CTIO AQUAE ET IGNIS. [Ex- " that when the praetor has ordered any thing to
SILIUM, p. 516, b.] be done or forbidden anything to be done, the
INTERDICTUM. " In certain cases (certis matter is not then ended, but the parties go before
ex causis) the praetor or proconsul, in the first in- a judex or recuperatores," he means that this furstance (principaliter), exercises his authority for ther proceeding takes place, if the praetor's Interthe termination of disputes. This he chiefly does dict does not settle the matter. The whole form
when the dispute is about Possession or Quasi- of proceeding is not clearly stated by some modern
possession; and the exercise of his authority con- writers, but the following is consistent with Gaius.
sists in ordering something to be done, or forbidding The complainant either obtained the Interdict
something to be done. The formulae and the or he did not, which would depend on the case
terms, which he uses on such occasions, are called that he made out before the praetor. If he failed,
either Interdicta or Decreta. They are called De- of course the litigation was at end; and if he obcreta when he orders something to be done, as tained the interdict, and the defendant complied
when he orders something to be produced (exliberi) with its terms, the matter in this case also was at
or to be restored: they are called Interdicta when an end. If the defendant simply did not obey the
he forbids something to be done, as when he orders terms of the Interdict, it. would be necessary for
that force shall not be used against a person who the complainant again to apply to the praetor, in
is in possession rightfully (sine vitio, or that no- order that this fact might be ascertained, and that
thing shall be done on a piece of sacred ground. the plaintiff might give full satisfaction. If the
Accordingly all Interdicta are either Restitutoria, or defendant was dissatisfied with the Interdict, lihe
Exhibitoria, or Prohibitoria." (Gaius, iv. 1 39, 14 0.) might also apply to the praetor for an investigation
This passage contains the essential distinction into the facts of the case: his allegation might be
I)etween an Actio and an Interdictum, so far as that there was originally no ground for the Interdict.
the praetor or proconsul is concerned. IIn the case He might also apply to the practor on the ground
of an Actio, the praetor pronounces no decree, but that he had satisfied the terms of the Interdict,
he gives a Judex, whose business it is to investi- though the plaintiff was not satisfied, or on the
gate the matter in dispute, and to pronounce a ground that he was unable to do more than he had
sentence consistently with the formula, which is done. In all these cases, when the praetor's order
his authority for acting. In the case of an Actio, did not terminate the dispute, he directed an intherefore, the praetor neither orders nor forbids a quiry by certain formulae, which were the instructhing to be done, but he says Judicium dabo. In tion of the judex, recuperatores, or arbiter. Acthe case of an Interdict, the praetor makes an cordingly, the process of the Interdict belonged
order that something shall be done or shall not be to the ordo judiciorum privatorum, but the judidone, and his words are accordingly words of com- cium was constituted by the peculiar process of
mand: Restituas, Exhibeas, Vim fieri veto. This the Interdict. The inquiry would be, Whether
immzediale interposition of the praetor is appropri- anything had been done contrary to the Praetor's
ately expressed by the word "principaliter," the Edict *'; or, Whether that had been done, which
full effect of which is more easily seen by its juxta- he had ordered to be done: the former inquiry
position with the other words of the passage, would be made in the case of a Prohibitory Interthan by any attempt to find an equivalent English diet; and the latter in the case of an Exhibitory
expression. or Restitutory Interdict.
Savigny observes that it may be objected to this In the case of Interdicta Prohibitoria there was
exposition, that in one of the most important In- always a sponsio; that is, the parties were reterdicts, that De Vi, the formula is, Judicium dabo; quired to deposit or give security for a sum of
(Dig. 43. tit. 16. s. 1.) But, as he observes, the money, the loss of which was in the nature of a
old genuine formula was, Restituas (Cic. pro penalty (poena) to the party who failed before the
(aecin. 8, 30); and the " Judicium dabo" must judex: this sponsio was probably required by the
have been introduced when the formulae of the praetor. In the case of Interdicta Restitutoria
two old Interdicts (De Vi Armata and De Vi and Prohibitoria, the proceeding was sometimes
Quotidiana) were blended together, and at a time per sponslonem, and therefore before a judex or re-when the distinctions between the old fomlulae cuperatores, and sometimes, without any sponsio,
had become a matter of indifference. per formulamn arbitrariam, that is, before an arbiter.
The mode of proceeding as to the Interdict was In the case of these two latter Interdicts, it seems
as follows: — The party aggrieved stated his case to have depended ont the party who claimed the
to the praetor, which was the foundation of his de- inquiry whether there should be a sponsio or not:
usmamd of an Interdict, and was therefore analogous if such party made a sponsio, that is, proffered to
to the Postulatio actionis. If the praetor saw pay a sum of money, if he did not make out his
sufficient reason, he might giant the Interdict,
which was often nothing more than the words of * "Edict" is the word used by Gains, but he
the Edict addressed to the litigant parties; and in means Interdict. He uses Edict, because the In..
doing so, he used his "auctoritas finiendis contro- terdict would only be granted in such cases as
versiis" in the first instance, or immediately and were provided for by the Edict (certis ex causis),
without the intervention of a judex (principaczter), and thus an Interdict was only an application of
-man also " certis ex causis," that is, in cases already the Edict to a particular case.