As decurions are constantly presenting petitions to Us, and We desire to be indulgent to them, We do not permit, under any circumstances, artifices opposed to law, and statements inspired by fraud, to have any validity.

  Eusebius and Aphthonius, sons of Palladius, and grandsons of Demetrius, informed Us that Demetrius owed Artemidorus five hundred aurei on account of a loan on which also interest was agreed to be paid, and that they wished to profit by an Imperial Pragmatic Sanction recently promulgated, which prescribed that where double the amount of the debt had been paid, nothing more could be collected from the debtor under Our laws. They also alleged that Epimachus and Artemon, successors of the creditor Artemidorus, declared that Eusebius and Aphthonius had made false statements in their petition, and that they were unworthy of any indulgence from Us, on account of double payment of the debt, and that only nine hundred and forty-nine aurei had been received. The petitioners answered that Palladius, their father, as well as Demetrius, their grandfather, and Paulus, had paid eight hundred and sixty-seven aurei. Artemon and Priscianus, the sons of Artemidorus, who was the grandfather of Epimachus, and the other Artemon, said in reply that partial payments should not be added to the principal; that they could only be considered as interest; that the Governor of the province had decided that this was the case; and that, for this reason, they had required of Palladius, for the first note bearing interest and calling for five hundred aurei, another note of six hundred. The reply of the petitioners to this was that the indebtedness had been paid at different times; that Palladius had paid seventy-two aurei, and Aphonius ten, which, together with the eight hundred and sixty-seven aurei already paid, made a total of nine hundred and forty-nine: As the judge who heard the case was not convinced that these partial payments should be credited on the entire amount of the debt, he had not admitted their claim, and had ordered them to pay six hundred aurei as principal. The petitioners asked Us to be released from this requirement, and to be discharged from liability for the entire indebtedness by paying fifty-one aurei more, and that the note of six hundred aurei bearing interest should be returned to them.

  Therefore, as Our laws do not require more than double the principal to be paid, the only difference existing between those previously enacted and this one is, that while they direct that the payment of interest, when it amounts to double the principal, shall extinguish the debt, where the said payments are not partial; We permit payments, even if they are partial, to extinguish the indebtedness, when they are equal to double the amount of the principal; and We order that the calculation of interest shall be made in this way, and that if the petitioners should pay enough to make up the thousand aurei, they will be entitled to recover the note of six hundred aurei bearing interest, in order that the debt may not be collected more than once.

  Your Magnificence will see that what it has pleased Us to enact in this Imperial Pragmatic Sanction is carried into effect, and that the interpretation given by the decisions which the petitioners have referred to Us, as well as every fraudulent act which has been, or may subsequently be committed by only one of the parties, is considered void. Most beloved brother, may God preserve you for many years.