Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1928)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Dig. VI2,
De Publiciana in rem actione
Liber sextus
II.

De Publiciana in rem actione

(Concerning the Publician Action in Rem.)

1Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Ait prae­tor: ‘Si quis id quod tra­di­tur ex ius­ta cau­sa non a do­mi­no et non­dum usu­cap­tum pe­tet, iu­di­cium da­bo.’ 1Me­ri­to prae­tor ait ‘non­dum usu­cap­tum’: nam si usu­cap­tum est, ha­bet ci­vi­lem ac­tio­nem nec de­si­de­rat ho­no­ra­riam. 2Sed cur tra­di­tio­nis dum­ta­xat et usu­ca­pio­nis fe­cit men­tio­nem, cum sa­tis mul­tae sunt iu­ris par­tes, qui­bus do­mi­nium quis nan­cis­ce­re­tur? ut pu­ta le­ga­tum

1Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. The Prætor says: “Where anyone desires to institute proceedings to recover property delivered to him for good reason, and the title to which has not yet passed by usucaption, I will grant him an action.” 1The Prætor says, and very properly, “Where the title has not yet passed by usucaption”; for, if this has once taken place, he has a right to a civil action and does not require an honorary one. 2But why did he merely mention delivery and usucaption, when there are numerous provisions of the law by means of which anyone may obtain ownership, as, for instance, in case of a bequest?

2Pau­lus li­bro no­no de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. vel mor­tis cau­sa do­na­tio­nes fac­tae: nam amis­sa pos­ses­sio­ne com­pe­tit Pu­bli­cia­na, quia ad ex­em­plum le­ga­to­rum ca­piun­tur.

2Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. Or donations made mortis causal For the Publician Action can be brought where possession has been lost, because it is obtained in the same way as a legacy.

3Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Sunt et aliae ple­rae­que. 1Ait prae­tor: ‘ex ius­ta cau­sa pe­tet.’ qui igi­tur ius­tam cau­sam tra­di­tio­nis ha­bet, uti­tur Pu­bli­cia­na: et non so­lum emp­to­ri bo­nae fi­dei com­pe­tit Pu­bli­cia­na, sed et aliis, ut pu­ta ei cui do­tis no­mi­ne tra­di­ta res est nec­dum usu­cap­ta: est enim ius­tis­si­ma cau­sa, si­ve aes­ti­ma­ta res in do­tem da­ta sit si­ve non. item si res ex cau­sa iu­di­ca­ti sit tra­di­ta

3Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. And there are many other provisions of the law to the same effect. 1Ad Dig. 6,2,3,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 179, Note 7.The Prætor says: “He may bring suit for a good reason”; and not only is the Publician Action available by a purchaser in good faith, but also by others; as for instance, by one to whom property has been transferred by way of dowry, and which has not yet been acquired by usucaption; for a very good cause of action exists whether the property given by way of dowry was appraised or not. Likewise, where property is transferred on account of a judgment:

4Pau­lus li­bro no­no de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. vel sol­ven­di cau­sa

4Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. Or for the purpose of paying a debt,

5Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. vel ex cau­sa no­xae de­di­tio­nis, si­ve ve­ra cau­sa sit si­ve fal­sa.

5Ad Dig. 6,2,5Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 199, Note 6.Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. Or for the surrender of a slave in lieu of damages, whether there was good ground for this, or not.

6Pau­lus li­bro no­no de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Item si ser­vum ex cau­sa noxa­li, quia non de­fen­de­ba­tur, ius­su prae­to­ris du­xe­ro et amis­e­ro pos­ses­sio­nem, com­pe­tit mi­hi Pu­bli­cia­na.

6Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. Moreover, in a noxal action, where no defence was made, I can remove the slave by order of the Prætor and if, after removing him, I lose possession of him, I can avail myself of the Publician Action.

7Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Sed et si res ad­iu­di­ca­ta sit, Pu­bli­cia­na ac­tio com­pe­tit. 1Si lis fue­rit aes­ti­ma­ta, si­mi­lis est ven­di­tio­ni: et ait Iu­lia­nus li­bro vi­cen­si­mo se­cun­do di­ges­to­rum, si op­tu­lit reus aes­ti­ma­tio­nem li­tis, Pu­bli­cia­nam com­pe­te­re. 2Mar­cel­lus li­bro sep­ti­mo de­ci­mo di­ges­to­rum scri­bit eum, qui a fu­rio­so igno­rans eum fu­re­re emit, pos­se usu­ca­pe­re: er­go et Pu­bli­cia­nam ha­be­bit. 3Sed et si quis ex lu­cra­ti­vis cau­sis rem ac­ce­pit, ha­bet Pu­bli­cia­nam, quae et­iam ad­ver­sus do­na­to­rem com­pe­tit: est enim ius­tus pos­ses­sor et pe­ti­tor, qui li­be­ra­li­ta­tem ac­ce­pit. 4Si a mi­no­re quis eme­rit igno­rans eum mi­no­rem es­se, ha­bet Pu­bli­cia­nam. 5Sed et si per­mu­ta­tio fac­ta sit, ea­dem ac­tio com­pe­tit. 6Pu­bli­cia­na ac­tio ad in­star pro­prie­ta­tis, non ad in­star pos­ses­sio­nis re­spi­cit. 7Si pe­ten­ti mi­hi rem ius­iu­ran­dum de­tu­le­ris ego­que iu­ra­ve­ro rem meam es­se, com­pe­tit Pu­bli­cia­na mi­hi, sed ad­ver­sus te dum­ta­xat: ei enim so­li no­ce­re de­bet ius­iu­ran­dum, qui de­tu­lit. sed si pos­ses­so­ri de­la­tum erit ius­iu­ran­dum et iu­ra­ve­rit rem pe­ti­to­ris non es­se, ad­ver­sus eum so­lum pe­ten­tem ex­cep­tio­ne ute­tur, non ut et ha­beat ac­tio­nem. 8In Pu­bli­cia­na ac­tio­ne om­nia ea­dem erunt, quae et in rei vin­di­ca­tio­ne di­xi­mus. 9Haec ac­tio et he­redi et ho­no­ra­riis suc­ces­so­ri­bus com­pe­tit. 10Si ego non eme­ro, sed ser­vus meus, ha­be­bo Pu­bli­cia­nam. idem est et si pro­cu­ra­tor meus vel tu­tor vel cu­ra­tor vel quis alius neg­otium meum ge­rens eme­rit. 11Prae­tor ait: ‘Qui bo­na fi­de emit.’ non igi­tur om­nis emp­tio prod­erit, sed ea, quae bo­nam fi­dem ha­bet: pro­in­de hoc suf­fi­cit me bo­nae fi­dei emp­to­rem fuis­se, quam­vis non a do­mi­no eme­rim, li­cet il­le cal­li­do con­si­lio ven­di­de­rit: ne­que enim do­lus ven­di­to­ris mi­hi no­ce­bit. 12In hac ac­tio­ne non ob­erit mi­hi, si suc­ces­sor sum et do­lo fe­ci, cum is, in cu­ius lo­cum suc­ces­si, bo­na fi­de emis­set: nec prod­erit, si do­lo ca­reo, cum emp­tor, cui suc­ces­si, do­lo fe­cis­set. 13Sed enim si ser­vus meus emit, do­lus eius erit spec­tan­dus, non meus, vel con­tra. 14Pu­bli­cia­na tem­pus emp­tio­nis con­ti­net, et id­eo ne­que quod an­te emp­tio­nem ne­que quod post­ea do­lo ma­lo fac­tum est in hac ac­tio­ne de­du­ci Pom­po­nio vi­de­tur. 15Bo­nam au­tem fi­dem so­lius emp­to­ris con­ti­net. 16Ut igi­tur Pu­bli­cia­na com­pe­tat, haec de­bent con­cur­re­re, ut et bo­na fi­de quis eme­rit et ei res emp­ta eo no­mi­ne sit tra­di­ta: ce­te­rum an­te tra­di­tio­nem, quam­vis bo­nae fi­dei quis emp­tor sit, ex­per­i­ri Pu­bli­cia­na non pot­erit. 17Iu­lia­nus li­bro sep­ti­mo di­ges­to­rum scrip­sit tra­di­tio­nem rei emp­tae opor­te­re bo­na fi­de fie­ri: id­eo­que si sciens alie­nam pos­ses­sio­nem ad­pre­hen­dit, Pu­bli­cia­na eum ex­per­i­ri non pos­se, quia usu­ca­pe­re non pot­erit. nec quis­quam pu­tet hoc nos ex­is­ti­ma­re suf­fi­ce­re in­itio tra­di­tio­nis igno­ras­se rem alie­nam, uti quis pos­sit Pu­bli­cia­na ex­per­i­ri, sed opor­te­re et tunc bo­na fi­de emp­to­rem es­se.

7Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. But if the property has been adjudged to me, I can bring the Publician Action. 1Where the value of the property is estimated in court it resembles a slave; and Julianus says in the Twenty-second Book of the Digest that, if the defendant tenders the amount of the appraisement, the Publician Action will lie. 2Ad Dig. 6,2,7,2Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 199, Note 5.Marcellus, in the Twenty-seventh Book of the Digest, says that where anyone purchases property from a person who is insane, being ignorant that this was the case, he can acquire it by usucaption; and therefore he will have a right to the Publician Action. 3Where anyone obtains property as a gift, he is entitled to the Publician Action; which also will lie against a donor; for the plaintiff is a lawful possessor where he accepts a donation. 4Ad Dig. 6,2,7,4Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 199, Note 6.Where a party purchases property from a minor, being ignorant that he is such, he has a right to the Publician Action. 5Also where an exchange has been made, the same action will lie. 6The Publician Action is not based on the question of possession, but upon that of ownership. 7If you tender me an oath in a suit which I have brought for the recovery of property, and I swear that the said property is mine, I am entitled to the Publician Action, but only against you; for the only person who can be prejudiced by the oath is the party who tendered it. If, however, the oath is tendered to the possessor, and he swears that the property does not belong to the plaintiff, he can make use of an exception only against the latter; for it does not operate to the extent of granting him a right of action. 8In the Publician Action, all those rules must be observed which we have mentioned in the action for the recovery of property. 9This action lies in favor of an heir as well as of prætorian successors. 10If I do not make a purchase, but my slave does, I am entitled to the Publician Action. The same rule applies where my agent, guardian, curator, or anyone else transacting my business makes a purchase. 11The Prætor says: “Who purchases in good faith”; therefore, it is not every purchase which can profit by the action, but only one made in good faith; hence it is enough if I am a purchaser in good faith even if I should not buy from the owner, although he may have made the sale to me with fraudulent intent; for the fraud of a vendor will not prejudice me. 12In this action it will be of no disadvantage to me if I am the successor of the purchaser, and acted fraudulently, where the party himself whom I succeeded made the purchase in good faith; and it will not profit me if I was not guilty of fraud, where the purchaser whom I succeeded was guilty of fraud. 13If, however, my slave made the purchase, his fraud, and not mine, must be considered; and vice versa. 14The Publician Action has reference to the time of the purchase, and therefore it is held by Pomponius that nothing which was fraudulently done, either before or after the purchase was made, can become the subject of investigation in this action. 15This action has reference to the good faith of the purchaser alone. 16Therefore, in order for the Publician Action to be available, the following conditions must exist: the person who made the purchase must have acted in good faith, and the property purchased must have been delivered to him with that understanding. But even if he made the purchase in good faith, he cannot make use of the Publician Action before delivery. 17Julianus stated in the Seventh Book of the Digest, that the delivery of the property purchased must be made in good faith; and therefore if the party knowingly fakes possession of something that belongs to another, he cannot avail himself of the Publician Action, because he will not be able to acquire the property by usucaption. Nor must anyone think that it is our opinion that it is sufficient for the purchaser to be ignorant that the property belonged to another at the commencement of delivery, in order to enable him to make use of the Publician Action, but it is necessary that he should be a bona fide purchaser at that time also.

8Gaius li­bro sep­ti­mo ad edic­tum pro­vin­cia­le. De pre­tio ve­ro so­lu­to ni­hil ex­pri­mi­tur: un­de pot­est con­iec­tu­ra ca­pi, qua­si nec sen­ten­tia prae­to­ris ea sit, ut re­qui­ra­tur, an so­lu­tum sit pre­tium.

8Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book VII. Nothing, however, is stated with reference to the payment of the purchase-money; wherefore it must be conjectured that it is not the opinion of the Prætor that it should be asked whether the price has been paid or not.

9Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Si­ve au­tem emp­to­ri res tra­di­ta est si­ve he­redi emp­to­ris, Pu­bli­cia­na com­pe­tit ac­tio. 1Si quis rem apud se de­po­si­tam vel si­bi com­mo­da­tam eme­rit vel pig­no­ri si­bi da­tam, pro tra­di­ta erit ac­ci­pien­da, si post emp­tio­nem apud eum re­man­sit. 2Sed et si prae­ces­sit tra­di­tio emp­tio­nem, idem erit di­cen­dum. 3Item si he­redi­ta­tem eme­ro et tra­di­tam mi­hi rem he­redi­ta­riam pe­te­re ve­lim, Ne­ra­tius scri­bit es­se Pu­bli­cia­nam. 4Si duo­bus quis se­pa­ra­tim ven­di­de­rit bo­na fi­de emen­ti­bus, vi­dea­mus, quis ma­gis Pu­bli­cia­na uti pos­sit, utrum is cui prio­ri res tra­di­ta est an is qui tan­tum emit. et Iu­lia­nus li­bro sep­ti­mo di­ges­to­rum scrip­sit, ut, si qui­dem ab eo­dem non do­mi­no eme­rint, po­tior sit cui prio­ri res tra­di­ta est, quod si a di­ver­sis non do­mi­nis, me­lior cau­sa sit pos­si­den­tis quam pe­ten­tis. quae sen­ten­tia ve­ra est. 5Haec ac­tio in his quae usu­ca­pi non pos­sunt, pu­ta fur­ti­vis vel in ser­vo fu­gi­ti­vo, lo­cum non ha­bet. 6Si ser­vus he­redi­ta­rius an­te ad­itam he­redi­ta­tem ali­quam rem eme­rit et tra­di­tam si­bi pos­ses­sio­nem amis­e­rit, rec­te he­res Pu­bli­cia­na uti­tur, qua­si ip­se pos­se­dis­set. mu­ni­ci­pes quo­que, quo­rum ser­vo res tra­di­ta est, in ea­dem erunt con­di­cio­ne,

9Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. The Publician Action is equally available whether the property is delivered to the purchaser or to his heir. 1Where a party purchases property which has been deposited with him, or loaned or pledged to him, it must be considered as having been delivered, if it remains in his possession after the purchase. 2The same rule will apply where the delivery preceded the purchase. 3Moreover, if I purchase an estate, and certain property belonging to it has been delivered to me for which I wish to bring suit, Neratius states that I will be entitled to the Publician Action. 4Ad Dig. 6,2,9,4Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 199, Note 13.Where anyone sells the same property separately to two bona fide purchasers, let us see which of them has the better right to the Publician Action; he to whom the property was first delivered, or he who merely bought it? Julianus, in the Seventh Book of the Digest, states: “That if the parties made the purchase from the same person who was not the owner, he will be preferred to whom delivery was made first; but if they buy said property from different persons who were not the owners, the one in possession is in a better legal position than the one who brings the action; and this opinion is correct.” 5This action is not available with reference to property which cannot be acquired by usucaption; as, for instance, in the case of articles that had been stolen, or fugitive slaves. 6Where a slave belonging to an estate purchases property before the estate has been entered upon, and after delivery loses possession of the same; the heir, very properly, has a right to the Publician Action, just as if he himself had been in possession. The members of a municipality also, where property has been delivered to their slave, will be in the same position;

10Pau­lus li­bro no­no de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. si­ve pe­cu­lia­ri no­mi­ne ser­vus eme­rit si­ve non.

10Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. Whether the slave purchased said property with reference to his own peculium, or not.

11Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Si ego emi et mea vo­lun­ta­te alii res sit tra­di­ta, im­pe­ra­tor Se­ve­rus re­scrip­sit Pu­bli­cia­nam il­li dan­dam. 1Si de usu fruc­tu aga­tur tra­di­to, Pu­bli­cia­na da­tur: item­que ser­vi­tu­ti­bus ur­ba­no­rum prae­dio­rum per tra­di­tio­nem con­sti­tu­tis vel per pa­tien­tiam (for­te si per do­mum quis suam pas­sus est aquae duc­tum trans­du­ci): item rus­ti­co­rum, nam et hic tra­di­tio­nem et pa­tien­tiam tuen­dam con­stat. 2Par­tus an­cil­lae fur­ti­vae, qui apud bo­nae fi­dei emp­to­rem con­cep­tus est, per hanc ac­tio­nem pe­ten­dus est, et­iam­si ab eo qui emit pos­ses­sus non est. sed he­res fu­ris hanc ac­tio­nem non ha­bet, quia vi­tio­rum de­func­ti suc­ces­sor est. 3In­ter­dum ta­men, li­cet fur­ti­va ma­ter dis­trac­ta non sit, sed do­na­ta igno­ran­ti mi­hi et apud me con­ce­pe­rit et pe­pe­re­rit, com­pe­tit mi­hi in par­tu Pu­bli­cia­na, ut Iu­lia­nus ait, si mo­do eo tem­po­re, quo ex­pe­riar, fur­ti­vam ma­trem igno­rem. 4Idem Iu­lia­nus ge­ne­ra­li­ter di­cit, ex qua cau­sa ma­trem usu­ca­pe­re pos­sem, si fur­ti­va non es­set, ex ea cau­sa par­tum me usu­ca­pe­re, si fur­ti­vam es­se ma­trem igno­ra­bam: ex om­ni­bus igi­tur cau­sis Pu­bli­cia­nam ha­be­bo. 5Idem est et si ex par­tu par­tus est et si non na­tus, sed post mor­tem ma­tris ex­sec­to ven­tre eius ex­trac­tus est, ut et Pom­po­nius li­bro qua­dra­gen­si­mo scrip­sit. 6Idem ait ae­di­bus emp­tis, si fue­rint di­ru­tae, ea quae ae­di­fi­cio ac­ces­se­runt hu­ius­mo­di ac­tio­ne pe­ten­da. 7Quod ta­men per al­lu­vio­nem fun­do ac­ces­sit, si­mi­le fit ei cui ac­ce­dit: et id­eo si ip­se fun­dus Pu­bli­cia­na pe­ti non pot­est, non hoc pe­te­tur, si au­tem pot­est, et ad par­tem, quae per al­lu­vio­nem ac­ces­sit: et ita Pom­po­nius scri­bit. 8Idem ad­icit et si sta­tuae emp­tae par­tes re­ci­sae pe­tan­tur, si­mi­lem ac­tio­nem pro­fi­ce­re. 9Idem scri­bit, si aream eme­ro et in­su­lam in ea ae­di­fi­ca­ve­ro, rec­te me Pu­bli­cia­na usu­rum. 10Item, in­quit, si in­su­lam emi et ad aream ea per­ve­nit, ae­que pot­ero uti Pu­bli­cia­na.

11Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. Where I have made a purchase, and the property has been delivered to another party at my request, the Emperor Severus stated in a Rescript that the Publician Action should be granted him. 1Ad Dig. 6,2,11,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 217, Note 9.The Publician Action is granted where suit is brought for the recovery of an usufruct which has been delivered, and also where servitudes of urban estates have been created by delivery, or by sufferance; for instance, where a party allowed an aqueduct to be built through his house. The same rule applies in the case of rustic servitudes, for it is established that in this case delivery and sufferance protect them. 2The offspring of a stolen female slave that was conceived while she was in possession of a bona fide purchaser, can be recovered by means of this action; even if the child was not in possession of the party who purchased it; but the heir of the thief is not entitled to this action, because he is the successor to the defective title of the deceased. 3Sometimes, however, even though the mother who was stolen had not been sold, but was presented to me (I being ignorant of the fact) and she afterwards conceived and brought forth while in my possession, I am entitled to a Publician Action to recover the child, as Julianus says; provided that, at the time I bring suit, I do not know that the mother was stolen. 4Julianus also states, in a general way, that no matter how I could acquire the mother by usucaption, if she had not been stolen, I can acquire the child in the same way, if I was ignorant that the mother had been stolen. Therefore, in all these instances, I will be entitled to the Publician Action. 5The same rule applies in the case of the child of the daughter of a female slave, even if it was not born, but after the death of its mother was extracted from her womb by the Cæsarean operation; as Pomponius stated in the Fortieth Book. 6He also says that where a house has been purchased and is destroyed, any additions made to it can be recovered by an action of this description. 7Where an accession is made to land by alluvial deposit, it becomes of the same nature as that to which it is added; and therefore since the land itself cannot be recovered by a Publician Action, the addition cannot be either; but if it can, the portion added by alluvion may be also recovered; and this was mentioned by Pomponius. 8He also adds that, where an action is to be brought for parts of a purchased statue which have been removed, a similar action is available. 9He also states, that if I purchase a vacant lot and build a house upon it, I can properly make use of the Publician Action. 10He also says, if I build a house, and the lot afterwards becomes vacant, I can likewise make use of the Publician Action.

12Pau­lus li­bro no­no de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Cum spon­sus spon­sae ser­vum do­nas­set eum­que in do­tem ac­ce­pis­set an­te usu­ca­pio­nem, re­scrip­tum est a di­vo Pio di­vor­tio fac­to re­sti­tuen­dum es­se ser­vum: nam va­luis­se do­na­tio­nem in­ter spon­sum et spon­sam. da­bi­tur er­go et pos­si­den­ti ex­cep­tio et amis­sa pos­ses­sio­ne Pu­bli­cia­na, si­ve ex­tra­neus si­ve do­na­tor pos­si­deat. 1Is cui ex Tre­bel­lia­no he­redi­tas re­sti­tu­ta est, et­iam­si non fue­rit nac­tus pos­ses­sio­nem, uti pot­est Pu­bli­cia­na. 2In vec­ti­ga­li­bus et in aliis prae­diis, quae usu­ca­pi non pos­sunt, Pu­bli­cia­na com­pe­tit, si for­te bo­na fi­de mi­hi tra­di­ta est. 3Idem est et si su­per­fi­cia­riam in­su­lam a non do­mi­no bo­na fi­de eme­ro. 4Si res ta­lis sit, ut eam lex aut con­sti­tu­tio alie­na­ri pro­hi­beat, eo ca­su Pu­bli­cia­na non com­pe­tit, quia his ca­si­bus ne­mi­nem prae­tor tue­tur, ne con­tra le­ges fa­ciat. 5Pu­bli­cia­na ac­tio­ne et­iam de in­fan­te ser­vo non­dum an­ni­cu­lo uti pos­su­mus. 6Si pro par­te quis rem pe­te­re vult, Pu­bli­cia­na ac­tio­ne uti pot­est. 7Sed et­iam is, qui mo­men­to pos­se­dit, rec­te hac ac­tio­ne ex­per­i­re­tur.

12Paulus, On the Edict, Book XIX. Where a man presented a slave to his betrothed, and, before the title passed by usucaption, received him back by way of dowry; it was stated by the Divine Pius in a Rescript that if the parties were divorced, the slave should be returned, for a gift between two betrothed persons is valid; and therefore she, as the possessor, will be granted an exception; and if possession should have been lost, the Publician Action would be granted, whether a stranger or the donor was in possession of the property. 1Where an estate is delivered to anyone under the Trebellian Decree of the Senate, even if the party should not obtain possession of the same, he can make use of the Publician Action. 2Ad Dig. 6,2,12,2Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 182, Note 5; Bd. I, § 199, Note 11.In the case of perpetual leases and other real property which can not be acquires by usucaption, the Publician Action is available where a bona fide delivery of the land has been made. 3The same rule applies where I purchased in good faith, from a person who is not the owner, a house which carried with it the surface of the land. 4If the property is of such a nature that some law or constitution forbids its alienation, in this instance the Publician Action will not lie, because, under such circumstances, the Prætor affords no protection to anyone to prevent his breaking the law. 5We can make use of the Publician Action even in the case of an infant slave less than a year old. 6Where anyone wishes to recover a portion of some property he can avail himself of the Publician Action. 7He also can properly employ this action who has had possession only for a moment.

13Gaius li­bro sep­ti­mo ad edic­tum pro­vin­cia­le. Quae­cum­que sunt ius­tae cau­sae ad­quiren­da­rum re­rum, si ex his cau­sis nac­ti res amis­e­ri­mus, da­bi­tur no­bis ea­rum re­rum per­se­quen­da­rum gra­tia haec ac­tio. 1In­ter­dum qui­bus­dam nec ex ius­tis pos­ses­sio­ni­bus com­pe­tit Pu­bli­cia­num iu­di­cium: nam­que pig­ne­ra­ti­ciae et pre­ca­riae pos­ses­sio­nes ius­tae sunt, sed ex his non so­let com­pe­te­re ta­le iu­di­cium, il­la sci­li­cet ra­tio­ne, quia ne­que cre­di­tor ne­que is qui pre­ca­rio ro­ga­vit eo ani­mo nan­cis­ci­tur pos­ses­sio­nem, ut cre­dat se do­mi­num es­se. 2Qui a pu­pil­lo emit, pro­ba­re de­bet tu­to­re auc­to­re le­ge non pro­hi­ben­te se emis­se. sed et si de­cep­tus fal­so tu­to­re auc­to­re eme­rit, bo­na fi­de emis­se vi­de­tur.

13Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book VII. Wherever property is legally acquired by us in any way and is lost, this action will be granted to us for the purpose of recovering said property. 1Sometimes, however, the Publician Action can not be brought by persons who have lawfully obtained possession; for possession derived from pledge and precarious gifts is lawful; but a right of action is not usually allowed in cases of this kind, of course, for the reason that neither the creditor nor the party who has a precarious title obtains possession with the understanding that he shall believe himself to be the owner. 2Ad Dig. 6,2,13,2Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 199, Note 6.When anyone makes a purchase from a minor, he must prove that he did so with the consent of his guardian, and not in violation of law. But where he made the purchase through the deceit of a pretended guardian, he is held to have acted in good faith.

14Ul­pia­nus li­bro sex­to de­ci­mo ad edic­tum. Pa­pi­nia­nus li­bro sex­to quaes­tio­num scri­bit: si quis pro­hi­buit vel de­nun­tia­vit ex cau­sa ven­di­tio­nis tra­di rem, quae ip­sius vo­lun­ta­te a pro­cu­ra­to­re fue­rat dis­trac­ta, et is ni­hi­lo mi­nus tra­di­de­rit, emp­to­rem tue­bi­tur prae­tor, si­ve pos­si­deat si­ve pe­tat rem. sed quod iu­di­cio emp­ti pro­cu­ra­tor emp­to­ri prae­sti­te­rit, con­tra­rio iu­di­cio man­da­ti con­se­que­tur: pot­est enim fie­ri, ut emp­to­ri res au­fe­ra­tur ab eo, qui venire man­da­vit, quia per igno­ran­tiam non est usus ex­cep­tio­ne, quam de­buit op­po­ne­re, vel­uti: ‘si non auc­tor meus ex vo­lun­ta­te tua ven­di­dit.’

14Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVI. Papinianus states in the Sixth Book of Questions, that where a man forbids delivery or gives notice, and the property has been sold by his agent at his request, and the agent delivered it in spite of this; the Prætor will protect the purchaser, whether he is in possession, or whether he brings an action to recover the property. But where the agent is compelled to make payment to the purchaser on account of an action based on purchase, the former can recover in a counter action on mandate; for it might happen that the property could be recovered from the purchaser by the party who gave the order to sell it, because through ignorance he did not make use of the exception which he should have pleaded, for instance: “If the party with whom I dealt did not make the sale with your consent”.

15Pom­po­nius li­bro ter­tio ad Sa­binum. Si ser­vus meus, cum in fu­ga sit, rem a non do­mi­no emat, Pu­bli­cia­na mi­hi com­pe­te­re de­bet, li­cet pos­ses­sio­nem rei tra­di­tae per eum nac­tus non sim.

15Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book III. If my slave, while in flight, purchases property from some one who is not the owner, the Publician Action will lie in my favor, even though I may not have obtained possession, through him, of the property delivered.

16Pa­pi­nia­ni li­bro de­ci­mo quaes­tio­num Pau­lus no­tat: Ex­cep­tio ius­ti do­mi­nii Pu­bli­cia­nae ob­icien­da est.

16Papinianus, Questions, Book X. Paulus states in a note that an exception on the ground of legal ownership may be pleaded in bar of the Publician Action.

17Ne­ra­tius li­bro ter­tio mem­bra­na­rum. Pu­bli­cia­na ac­tio non id­eo com­pa­ra­ta est, ut res do­mi­no au­fe­ra­tur: eius­que rei ar­gu­men­tum est pri­mo ae­qui­tas, de­in­de ex­cep­tio ‘si ea res pos­ses­so­ris non sit’: sed ut is, qui bo­na fi­de emit pos­ses­sio­nem­que eius ex ea cau­sa nac­tus est, po­tius rem ha­beat.

17Neratius, Parchments, Book III. The Publician Action was not invented for the purpose of depriving the real owner of his property (and this is proved in the first place on equitable principles; and in the second place by the use of the exception: “If the property in dispute does not belong to the possessor”); but, for the reason that where a man purchases anything in good faith and has obtained possession of it, he, rather than his adversary, should be entitled to hold it.