Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts
Dig. VIII3,
De servitutibus praediorum rusticorum
Liber octavus
III.

De servitutibus praediorum rusticorum

(Concerning the servitudes of rustic estates.)

1 Ulpianus libro secundo institutionum. Servitutes rusticorum praediorum sunt hae: iter actus via aquae ductus. iter est ius eundi ambulandi homini, non etiam iumentum agendi. actus est ius agendi vel iumentum vel vehiculum: itaque qui iter habet, actum non habet, qui actum habet, et iter habet etiam sine iumento. via est ius eundi et agendi et ambulandi: nam et iter et actum in se via continet. aquae ductus est ius aquam ducendi per fundum alienum. 1In rusticis computanda sunt aquae haustus, pecoris ad aquam adpulsus, ius pascendi, calcis coquendae, harenae fodiendae. 2Traditio plane et patientia servitutium inducet officium praetoris.

1 Ulpianus, Institutes, Book II. The following are the servitudes of rustic estates, namely: the right of walking, driving cattle, the right of way, and the right to conduct water. The first is the right a man has to pass or walk, but not to drive a beast of burden. The second is the right to drive a beast of burden, or a vehicle; and therefore a party who has the right to walk, has not the right to drive cattle; and he who has the latter privilege has also that of walking even without a beast of burden. The third is the right of passing, driving, or walking, for all are included in the right of way. The last is the right to conduct water over the land of another. 1Among rustic servitudes must be enumerated the right to draw water, as well as that to drive cattle to water, the right of pasturage, the rights of burning lime and of digging sand. 2It is clear that the delivery of servitudes and the toleration of the same admit of the intervention of the Prætor.

2 Neratius libro quarto regularum. Rusticorum praediorum servitutes sunt licere altius tollere et officere praetorio vicini, vel cloacam habere licere per vicini domum vel praetorium, vel protectum habere licere. 1Aquae ductus et haustus aquae per eundem locum ut ducatur, etiam pluribus concedi potest: potest etiam, ut diversis diebus vel horis ducatur: 2si aquae ductus vel haustus aquae sufficiens est, potest et pluribus per eundem locum concedi, ut et isdem diebus vel horis ducatur.

2 Neratius, Rules, Book IV. The servitudes of rustic estates include the right to raise a building and interfere with the residence of a neighbor, or to have a drain under the house or residence of a neighbor, or to have a projecting roof. 1The right to an aqueduct, or to draw water in order that it may be conducted over the same place, can also be granted to several persons; and this can be done on different days, or at different hours. 2Where the water-course or the supply of water to be drawn is sufficient, the right may be granted to several people to conduct the water over the same place, on the same days, or during the same hours.

3 Ulpianus libro septimo decimo ad edictum. Item sic possunt servitutes imponi, et ut boves, per quos fundus colitur, in vicino agro pascantur: quam servitutem imponi posse Neratius libro secundo membranarum scribit. 1Idem Neratius etiam ut fructus in vicini villa cogantur coactique habeantur et pedamenta ad vineam ex vicini praedio sumantur, constitui posse scribit. 2Eodem libro ait vicino, cuius lapidicinae fundo tuo immineant, posse te cedere ius ei esse terram rudus saxa iacere posita habere, et ut in tuum lapides provolvantur ibique positi habeantur indeque exportentur. 3Qui habet haustum, iter quoque habere videtur ad hauriendum et, ut ait Neratius libro tertio membranarum, sive ei ius hauriendi et adeundi cessum sit, utrumque habebit, sive tantum hauriendi, inesse et aditum sive tantum adeundi ad fontem, inesse et haustum. haec de haustu ex fonte privato. ad flumen autem publicum idem Neratius eodem libro scribit iter debere cedi, haustum non oportere et si quis tantum haustum cesserit, nihil eum agere.

3 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XVII. Moreover, servitudes may be created in such a way that oxen by means of which the land is cultivated may be pastured in neighboring fields; and Neratius, in the Second Book of Parchments, holds that such a servitude can be imposed. 1Neratius also says that a servitude can be created so that crops may be collected in the farm-house of a neighbor and kept there; and that the supports for vines may be taken from the land of a neighbor. 2In the same Book he says that where stone quarries belonging to a neighbor adjoin your land, you can grant him the right to throw dirt, rubbish, and rocks thereon, and to leave them there, or to let stones roll upon your land, to be left there until they are removed by you. 3Where anyone has the right to draw water, he is considered also to have the right of passage for the purpose of doing so; and, as Neratius says in the Third Book of Parchments, if the right to draw the water and the right of access for that purpose are both granted him, he will be entitled to both; but where only the right of drawing water is granted, the right of access is also included; or where only access to the spring is granted, the right to draw water is included. This has reference to water drawn from a private spring. In the case of a public stream, Neratius states in the same Book, that the right of passage to it must be granted, but the right to draw the water is not necessary, and where anyone grants only the right to draw water, the grant will be void.

4 Papinianus libro secundo responsorum. Pecoris pascendi servitutes, item ad aquam appellendi, si praedii fructus maxime in pecore consistat, praedii magis quam personae videtur: si tamen testator personam demonstravit, cui servitutem praestari voluit, emptori vel heredi non eadem praestabitur servitus.

4 Papinianus, Opinions, Book II. Servitudes for the pasturage of cattle, and also that of taking them to water, where the principal income of the land is derived from cattle, are held to be attached to the land, rather than to the person; but if a testator designated some certain individual in whose favor he desired the servitude to be established, it will not pass from the said person to the purchaser of the land, or to his own heir.

5 Ulpianus libro septimo decimo ad edictum. Ergo secundum eum et vindicari poterit. 1Neratius libris ex Plautio ait nec haustum nec appulsum pecoris nec cretae eximendae calcisque coquendae ius posse in alieno esse, nisi fundum vicinum habeat: et hoc Proculum et Atilicinum existimasse ait. sed ipse dicit, ut maxime calcis coquendae et cretae eximendae servitus constitui possit, non ultra posse, quam quatenus ad eum ipsum fundum opus sit:

5 Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XVII. Therefore, according to him, the servitude can be recovered by an action. 1Neratius, in his work on Plautius, says that the right of drawing water for cattle or of driving cattle to water, or of digging chalk or of burning lime, on the ground of another, cannot exist unless the party has adjoining land; and he states that Proculus and Atilicinus hold the same opinion. But he also says that, although there is no question that a servitude for burning lime and digging chalk can be established, still this cannot be done for a greater amount than the requirements of the dominant estate demand.

6 Paulus libro quinto decimo ad Plautium. veluti si figlinas haberet, in quibus ea vasa fierent, quibus fructus eius fundi exportarentur (sicut in quibusdam fit, ut amphoris vinum evehatur aut ut dolia fiant), vel tegulae vel ad villam aedificandam. sed si, ut vasa venirent, figlinae exercerentur, usus fructus erit. 1Item longe recedit ab usu fructu ius calcis coquendae et lapidis eximendi et harenae fodiendae aedificandi eius gratia quod in fundo est, item silvae caeduae, ut pedamenta in vineas non desint. quid ergo si praediorum meliorem causam haec faciant? non est dubitandum, quin servitutis sit: et hoc et Maecianus probat in tantum, ut et talem servitutem constitui posse putet, ut tugurium mihi habere liceret in tuo, scilicet si habeam pascui servitutem aut pecoris appellendi, ut si hiemps ingruerit, habeam quo me recipiam.

6 Paulus, On Plautius, Book XV. For example, when a man had a pottery, where vessels were made by means of which the produce of the land was taken away; just as in certain places it is usual for wine to be transported in jars, or vats to be constructed, or tiles to be made to be used in the construction of a house. If, however, the pottery was employed for the manufacture and sale of vessels, an usufruct would exist. 1Moreover, the right of burning lime, quarrying stone, and digging sand, for the purpose of building something on the land differs very greatly from an usufruct; and so does the right to cut stakes for vines so that supports may not be lacking. But what would be the case if these things improved the condition of the property? It cannot be doubted that they are of the nature of servitudes, and this Marcianus approves to such an extent that he thinks that a servitude can be created permitting me to build a hut on your land; provided, of course, that I possess a servitude of pasturage, or of driving cattle to water; so that I may have a place in which to take refuge when the weather is bad.

7 Idem libro vicensimo primo ad edictum. Qui sella aut lectica vehitur, ire, non agere dicitur: iumentum vero ducere non potest, qui iter tantum habet. qui actum habet, et plostrum ducere et iumenta agere potest. sed trahendi lapidem aut tignum neutri eorum ius est: quidam nec hastam rectam ei ferre licere, quia neque eundi neque agendi gratia id faceret et possent fructus eo modo laedi. qui viam habent, eundi agendique ius habent: plerique et trahendi quoque et rectam hastam referendi, si modo fructus non laedat. 1In rusticis autem praediis impedit servitutem medium praedium, quod non servit.

7 The Same, On the Edict, Book XXI. Where anyone is borne on a chair or a litter, he is said to have the right to go on foot, and not to drive; but a party who has only the right to pass on foot, cannot drive a beast of burden. If he has the right to drive cattle, he can drive a wagon or beast of burden, but in neither instance has he a right to haul stone or timber. Some authorities hold that he cannot carry a spear upright, because he would not do this if he were either walking or driving, and fruit might be injured by doing so. A party who has a right of way has also the right to pass on foot and to drive; and the greater number of authorities hold that he can drag objects also, and carry a spear upright, provided he does not injure the fruit. 1In the case of rustic estates, a field lying between them which is not subject to a servitude renders a servitude inoperative.

8 Gaius libro septimo ad edictum provinciale. Viae latitudo ex lege duodecim tabularum in porrectum octo pedes habet, in anfractum, id est ubi flexum est, sedecim.

8 Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book VII. By the Law of the Twelve Tables, the width of a road subject to a right of way, must be eight feet, where it is straight; but where there is a bend, that is to say where the road curves, it must be sixteen.

9 Paulus libro primo sententiarum. Servitus aquae ducendae vel hauriendae nisi ex capite vel ex fonte constitui non potest: hodie tamen ex quocumque loco constitui solet.

9 Paulus, Sentences, Book I. A servitude for the conducting or drawing of water from any other point than the source or spring cannot be established; but at present it is customary for it to be established from any place whatsoever.

10 Idem libro quadragensimo nono ad edictum. Labeo ait talem servitutem constitui posse, ut aquam quaerere et inventam ducere liceat: nam si liceat nondum aedificato aedificio servitutem constituere, quare non aeque liceat nondum inventa aqua eandem constituere servitutem? et si, ut quaerere liceat, cedere possumus, etiam ut inventa ducatur, cedi potest.

10 The Same, On the Edict, Book XLIX. Labeo says that a servitude may be created in such a way that a party can be permitted to look for water and convey it, if it is found; for if it is lawful to create a servitude relating to a house which is not yet built, why should it not be equally lawful to create one with reference to water which has not yet been found? Moreover, if it is lawful for us to grant a servitude for a party to seek for water, it can also be granted premitting him to conduct it after it has been found.

11 Celsus libro vicensimo septimo digestorum. Per fundum, qui plurium est, ius mihi esse eundi agendi potest separatim cedi. ergo suptili ratione non aliter meum fiet ius, quam si omnes cedant et novissima demum cessione superiores omnes confirmabuntur: benignius tamen dicetur et antequam novissimus cesserit, eos, qui antea cesserunt, vetare uti cesso iure non posse.

11 Celsus, Digest, Book XXVII. Where the right of passing or driving through land belongs to several persons, it can be granted to me separately by each of them. Therefore, strictly speaking, the right will not become mine unless all of them grant it; and when the last grant is made all those made previously will become operative. The more favorable construction, however, is, that before the last party makes the grant, those who have previously done so cannot prevent me from using the right already granted.

12 Modestinus libro nono differentiarum. Inter actum et iter nonnulla est differentia: iter est enim, qua quis pedes vel eques commeare potest, actus vero, ubi et armenta traicere et vehiculum ducere liceat.

12 Modestinus, Differences, Book IX. There is a difference between the right to drive cattle, and the right of passage; where anyone can travel either on foot, or on horseback, the latter right exists; but where he can drive a herd of cattle, or take a vehicle, the former right is implied.

13 Iavolenus libro decimo ex Cassio. Certo generi agrorum adquiri servitus potest, velut vineis, quod ea ad solum magis quam ad superficiem pertinet. ideo sublatis vineis servitus manebit: sed si in contrahenda servitute aliud actum erit, doli mali exceptio erit necessaria. 1Si totus ager itineri aut actui servit, dominus in eo agro nihil facere potest, quo servitus impediatur, quae ita diffusa est, ut omnes glaebae serviant, aut si iter actusve sine ulla determinatione legatus est: modo determinabitur et qua primum iter determinatum est, ea servitus constitit, ceterae partes agri liberae sunt: igitur arbiter dandus est, qui utroque casu viam determinare debet. 2Latitudo actus itinerisque ea est, quae demonstrata est: quod si nihil dictum est, hoc ab arbitro statuendum est. in via aliud iuris est: nam si dicta latitudo non est, legitima debetur. 3Si locus non adiecta latitudine nominatus est, per eum qualibet iri poterit: sin autem praetermissus est aeque latitudine non adiecta, per totum fundum una poterit eligi via dumtaxat eius latitudinis, quae lege comprehensa est: pro quo ipso, si dubitabitur, arbitri officium invocandum est.

13 Javolenus, On Cassius, Book X. A servitude may be acquired in favor of certain kinds of land, as for instance, vineyards, because this would have reference rather to the soil itself than to the surface of the same; so that, if the vineyards were removed, the servitude will remain. But if another intention existed when the servitude was created, an exception on the ground of malicious fraud will be necessary. 1Where an entire field is subject to a servitude of passage or the driving of cattle, the owner cannot do anything in the said field by which the servitude may be interfered with; because it is so extended that every clod is subject to it. But where the right of passage or to drive cattle is bequeathed without any limit, the limits shall be established at once, and where they are first established there will the servitudes be created, and the remaining parts of the field will be free. Hence, an arbiter must be appointed who, in both instances, should determine the direction of the right of way. 2The width of a driveway for cattle, and that of a pathway, is the one which was designated; and if nothing was said with reference to it, it must be fixed by the arbiter. In the case of a right of way the rule is different; for if the width is not stated, that which is established by law is the proper one. 3If the place is designated but the width is not given, the party can cross said place wherever he wishes. But if the place is not mentioned and the width is not stated, a right of way may be chosen over any portion of the land, but the width of the same must be that prescribed by law; and if there is any doubt as to the direction, the services of an arbiter must be enlisted to decide it.

14 Pomponius libro trigensimo secundo ad Quintum Mucium. Per quem locum viam alii cessero, per eundem alii aquae ductum cedere non potero: sed et si aquae ductum alii concessero, alii iter per eundem locum vendere vel alias cedere non potero.

14 Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book XXXII. If I grant a right of way to anyone through a certain place, I cannot grant a water-course to another through the same place; and if I grant a water-course, I cannot sell or grant a footpath to another through the same place.

15 Idem libro trigensimo primo ad Quintum Mucium. Quintus Mucius scribit, cum iter aquae vel cottidianae vel aestivae vel quae intervalla longiora habeat per alienum fundum erit, licere fistulam suam vel fictilem vel cuiuslibet generis in rivo ponere, quae aquam latius exprimeret, et quod vellet in rivo facere, licere, dum ne domino praedii aquagium deterius faceret.

15 The Same, On Quintus Mucius, Book XXXI. Quintus Mucius says that where a party has the right to conduct water every day, or during the summer, or for longer intervals, through the land of another; he has also the right to place pipes of earthenware or of any other material in the channel, so as to distribute the water more widely, and that he can do whatever he pleases in the channel, provided he does not render the water-course less valuable to the owner of the land.

16 Callistratus libro tertio de cognitionibus. Divus Pius aucupibus ita rescripsit: οὐκ ἔστιν εὔλογον ἀκόντων τῶν δεσποτῶν ὑμᾶς ἐν ἀλλοτρίοις χωρίοις ἰξεύειν.

16 Callistratus, On Judicial Inquiries, Book III. The Divine Pius stated in a Rescript to bird-catchers, “It is not proper for you to catch birds on the land of others without the consent of the owners”.

17 Papirius Iustus libro primo de constitutionibus. Imperatores Antoninus et Verus Augusti rescripserunt aquam de flumine publico pro modo possessionum ad irrigandos agros dividi oportere, nisi proprio iure quis plus sibi datum ostenderit. item rescripserunt aquam ita demum permitti duci, si sine iniuria alterius id fiat.

17 Papirius Justus, On Constitutions, Book I. The August Emperors Antoninus and Verus stated in a Rescript, that, “Where water is taken from a public river for the purpose of irrigating fields, it should be divided in proportion to the size of the same; unless someone can prove that, by virtue of a special privilege, he is entitled to more”. They also stated in a Rescript that, “A party should only be permitted to conduct water where this can be done without injury to another”.

18 Ulpianus libro quarto decimo ad Sabinum. Una est via et si per plures fundos imponatur, cum una servitus sit. denique quaeritur, an, si per unum fundum iero, per alium non per tantum tempus, quanto servitus amittitur, an retineam servitutem? et magis est, ut aut tota amittatur aut tota retineatur: ideoque si nullo usus sum, tota amittitur, si vel uno, tota servatur.

18 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XIV. Where a right of way is created through several different tracts of land, it is still a single road, just as the servitude is also single, hence the question arises: If I pass through one tract of land but not through another for such a time as is necessary for the servitude to be extinguished, do I retain the servitude? The better opinion is that it is entirely lost, or entirely retained; therefore if I did not make use of either tract at all, the whole servitude is lost; but if I make use of one, the entire servitude is preserved.

19 Paulus libro sexto ad Sabinum. Si unus ex sociis stipuletur iter ad communem fundum, inutilis est stipulatio, quia nec dari ei potest: sed si omnes stipulentur sive communis servus, singuli ex sociis sibi dari oportere petere possunt, quia ita dari eis potest: ne, si stipulator viae plures heredes reliquerit, inutilis stipulatio fiat.

19 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book VI. Where one of several joint-owners stipulates for a right of passage through land held in common, the stipulation is void, as the right can not be given him; but where they all stipulate, or a slave owned in common by them does so, each of the joint-owners can bring an action asking that the right of way be granted him, because this can be granted by you to all of them in this manner; lest if the stipulator for the right of way should die and leave several heirs, the stipulation may become of no effect.

20 Pomponius libro trigensimo tertio ad Sabinum. Si mihi eodem tempore concesseris et ire agere per tuum locum et uti frui eo ius esse, deinde ego tibi concessero ius mihi uti frui non esse: non aliter eo loco uteris frueris, quam ut ire agere mihi recte liceat. item si et ducere per tuum fundum aquam iure potuero et in eo tibi aedificare invito me ius non fuerit: si tibi concessero ius esse aedificare, nihilo minus hanc servitutem mihi praestare debebis, ne aliter aedifices, quam ut ductus aquae meus maneat, totiusque eius rei condicio talis esse debet, qualis esset, si una dumtaxat initio concessio facta esset. 1Servitus naturaliter, non manu facto laedere potest fundum servientem: quemadmodum si imbri crescat aqua in rivo aut ex agris in eum confluat aut aquae fons secundum rivum vel in eo ipso inventus postea fuerit. 2Si fundo Seiano confinis fons fuerit, ex quo fonte per fundum Seianum aquam iure ducebam, meo facto fundo Seiano manet servitus. 3Hauriendi ius non hominis, sed praedii est.

20 Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXXIII. If you grant me at the same time the right to walk and drive over your premises, and also the right to use and enjoy the same, and then I surrender to you my right of use and enjoyment, you cannot use and enjoy the property, unless you leave me the unimpaired right to pass through or drive. Moreover, if I have a right to conduct water through your land, and you do not have the right to build upon the same without my consent, and I grant you the right to build, you must, nevertheless, grant me the servitude that you will not erect any building except in such a way, that my water-course may remain unaltered; and the condition of everything must continue to be the same as it would have been if, in the beginning, only a single grant had been made. 1A servitude can damage the land subject to it naturally, and not through anything due to the agency of man; as, for instance, if the water in the channel should be increased by showers; or water should flow into it from an adjoining field; or a spring should afterwards be discovered along the channel or within it. 2If there is a spring adjoining the Seian Estate from which spring I have a right to conduct the water through the said estate, and the estate should become mine, the servitude will remain. 3The right to draw water does not attach to a person but to the land.

21 Paulus libro quinto decimo ad Sabinum. Si mihi concesseris iter aquae per fundum tuum non destinata parte, per quam ducerem, totus fundus tuus serviet:

21 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book XV. If you grant me a water-course through your land without designating the part through which I shall conduct it, all your land will be subject to the servitude.

22 Pomponius libro trigensimo tertio ad Sabinum. sed quae loca eius fundi tunc, cum ea fieret cessio, aedificiis arboribus vineis vacua fuerint, ea sola eo nomine servient.

22 Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXXIII. But then the only parts of the land which would be affected by the servitude are those which were free from buildings, trees, or vines, when the grant was made.

23 Paulus libro quinto decimo ad Sabinum. Via constitui vel latior octo pedibus vel angustior potest, ut tamen eam latitudinem habeat, qua vehiculum ire potest: alioquin iter erit, non via. 1Si lacus perpetuus in fundo tuo est, navigandi quoque servitus, ut perveniatur ad fundum vicinum, imponi potest. 2Si fundus serviens vel is cui servitus debetur publicaretur, utroque casu durant servitutes, quia cum sua condicione quisque fundus publicaretur. 3Quaecumque servitus fundo debetur, omnibus eius partibus debetur: et ideo quamvis particulatim venierit, omnes partes servitus sequitur et ita, ut singuli recte agant ius sibi esse eundi. si tamen fundus, cui servitus debetur, certis regionibus inter plures dominos divisus est, quamvis omnibus partibus servitus debeatur, tamen opus est, ut hi, qui non proximas partes servienti fundo habebunt, transitum per reliquas partes fundi divisi iure habeant aut, si proximi patiantur, transeant.

23 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book XV. A right of way can be granted wider or narrower than eight feet, so long as it is wide enough to be traversed by a vehicle; otherwise it would be a right of passage and not a right of way. 1Where there is a permanent lake on your premises, the servitude of navigating it may be imposed, in order to obtain access to adjoining land. 2If the servient estate, or that to which the servitude is attached, should be confiscated, the servitude remains unimpaired in both instances, because land which is confiscated retains its former condition. 3Wherever a servitude is attached to an estate, it is attached to every part of it; and therefore if the property is sold a portion at a time, the servitude follows every portion; hence the separate owners can properly bring actions setting forth that they have a right of way over said land. Where, however, land subject to a servitude is divided into certain tracts among several owners, although the servitude attaches to all portions of the same, it will, nevertheless, be necessary for those who own shares that do not join the land subject to the servitude to have a legal right of passage through other parts of the land which has been divided; or traverse it, if the adjacent owners allow this to be done,

24 Pomponius libro trigensimo tertio ad Sabinum. Ex meo aquae ductu Labeo scribit cuilibet posse me vicino commodare: Proculus contra, ut ne in meam partem fundi aliam, quam ad quam servitus adquisita sit, uti ea possit. Proculi sententia verior est.

24 Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book XXXIII. Labeo states with reference to a water-course of mine, that I can lend it to any of my neighbors; but Proculus, on the other hand, says that it cannot be used for the benefit of any part of my land except that for which the servitude was acquired. The opinion of Proculus is the more correct one.

25 Idem libro trigensimo quarto ad Sabinum. Si partem fundi mei certam tibi vendidero, aquae ductus ius, etiamsi alterius partis causa plerumque ducatur, te quoque sequetur: neque ibi aut bonitatis agri aut usus eius aquae ratio habenda est ita, ut eam solam partem fundi, quae pretiosissima sit aut maxime usum eius aquae desideret, ius eius ducendae sequatur, sed pro modo agri detenti aut alienati fiat eius aquae divisio.

25 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXXIV. If I sell you a certain part of my land, the right to an aqueduct will also belong to you, even though it is principally used for the benefit of another part; and neither the excellence of the soil, nor the use of the water should be taken into consideration to imply that the right of conducting the water is only attached to that part of the property which is most valuable, or especially requires the use of it; but the division of the water must be made in proportion to the quantity of land reserved or alienated.

26 Paulus libro quadragensimo septimo ad edictum. Si via iter actus aquae ductus legetur simpliciter per fundum, facultas est heredi, per quam partem fundi velit, constituere servitutem, si modo nulla captio legatario in servitute fit.

26 Paulus, On the Edict, Book XLVII. Where a right of way, a right to pass on foot, a right to drive cattle, or a right to an aqueduct through land is bequeathed, it is in the power of the heir to establish the servitude over any part of the same that he wishes, provided no advantage is taken of the legatee with reference to the servitude.

27 Iulianus libro septimo digestorum. Si communi fundo meo et tuo serviat fundus Sempronianus et eundem in commune redemerimus, servitus extinguitur, quia par utriusque domini ius in utroque fundo esse incipit. at si proprio meo fundo et proprio tuo idem serviat, manebit servitus, quia proprio fundo per communem servitus deberi potest.

27 Julianus, Digest, Book VII. If the Sempronian Estate is subject to a servitude in favor of land owned by you and me in common, and we purchase the same to be held in common, the servitude is extinguished; because the right of each owner has become the same in the two estates, respectively. But where the land purchased was subject to my own estate and to yours as well, the servitude will remain; because a servitude over an estate held in common can be attached to land owned in severalty.

28 Idem libro trigensimo quarto digestorum. Itinere ad praedium commune duorum legato nisi uterque de loco itineris consentiat, servitus neque adquiritur neque deperit.

28 The Same, Digest, Book XXXIV. Where a right to pass through land is bequeathed to an estate held in common by two persons, unless both of them agree as to the direction of the pathway, the servitude is neither acquired nor lost.

29 Paulus libro secundo epitomarum Alfeni digestorum. Qui duo praedia confinia habuerat, superiorem fundum vendiderat: in lege ita dixerat, ut aquam sulco aperto emptori educere in fundum inferiorem recte liceat: si emptor ex alio fundo aquam acciperet et eam in inferiorem ducere vellet, quaesitum est, an possit id suo iure facere nec ne. respondi nihil amplius, quam quod ipsius fundi siccandi causa derivaret, vicinum inferiorem recipere debere.

29 Paulus, Epitomes of the Digest of Alfenus, Book II. A party who had two adjoining tracts of land and sold the upper one. In the agreement it was stated that the purchaser should have the lawful right to discharge water upon the lower tract of land through an open ditch. The question then arose, if the purchaser should receive water from another tract, and wishes to discharge it upon the lower one, can he do so legally, or not? I answered that the lower neighbor was not obliged to receive more water than was necessary for the purpose of draining the land of the purchaser.

30 Idem libro quarto epitomarum Alfeni digestorum. Qui duo praedia habebat, in unius venditione aquam, quae in fundo nascebatur, et circa eam aquam late decem pedes exceperat: quaesitum est, utrum dominium loci ad eum pertineat an ut per eum locum accedere possit. respondit, si ita recepisset: ‘circa eam aquam late pedes decem’, iter dumtaxat videri venditoris esse.

30 The Same, Epitomes of the Digest of Alfenus, Book IV. A man who had two tracts of land, in the sale of one of them reserved the water which came from a spring on the land, and also a space of ten feet around it. The question arose whether the ownership of the ground reserved belonged to him, or merely whether he was entitled to access to it? The answer was that, “If what he retained was ten feet wide around said spring”, it should be held that the vendor had only a right of way.

31 Iulianus libro secundo ex Minicio. Tria praedia continua trium dominorum adiecta erant: imi praedii dominus ex summo fundo imo fundo servitutem aquae quaesierat et per medium fundum domino concedente in suum agrum ducebat: postea idem summum fundum emit: deinde imum fundum, in quem aquam induxerat, vendidit. quaesitum est, num imus fundus id ius aquae amisisset, quia, cum utraque praedia eiusdem domini facta essent, ipsa sibi servire non potuissent. negavit amississe servitutem, quia praedium, per quod aqua ducebatur, alterius fuisset et quemadmodum servitus summo fundo, ut in imum fundum aqua veniret, imponi aliter non potuisset, quam ut per medium quoque fundum duceretur, sic eadem servitus eiusdem fundi amitti aliter non posset, nisi eodem tempore etiam per medium fundum aqua duci desisset aut omnium tria simul praedia unius domini facta essent.

31 Julianus, On Minicius, Book II. Three tracts of land which were contiguous belonged to three owners, and the owner of the lowest one had acquired for his tract from the highest one the servitude of a water-course, and this he conducted into his own land through the intervening tract with the permission of the owner of the same, and he afterwards bought the highest tract, and sold the lowest one on to which he had conducted the water. The question was asked whether the lowest tract had lost the right of conducting the water, because as both estates had become the property of the same owner no servitude could exist between them? It was denied that the lowest tract had lost the servitude because the land through which the water was conducted belonged to another, and as no servitude could be imposed in any other way upon the uppermost tract so that the water might reach the lowest one, except by being conducted through the intermediate tract; so the same servitude in favor of the same tract of land could not be lost, unless, at the same time, the watercourse should cease to be conducted through the intermediate tract, or unless all three tracts should simultaneously become the property of a single owner.

32 Africanus libro sexto quaestionum. Fundus mihi tecum communis est: partem tuam mihi tradidisti et ad eundem viam per vicinum tuum proprium. recte eo modo servitutem constitutam ait neque quod dici soleat per partes nec adquiri nec imponi servitutes posse isto casu locum habere: hic enim non per partem servitutem adquiri, utpote cum in id tempus adquiratur, quo proprius meus fundus futurus sit.

32 Africanus, Questions, Book VI. Where a tract of land is held in common by you and myself, and you have conveyed your portion of it to me, and also a right of way to said tract through your own adjoining property; it was held that the servitude was properly created in that way; and that, in this instance, the ordinary rule that servitudes cannot either be imposed or acquired with reference to shares is not applicable; for in this case the servitude is not acquired with reference to a share, but is acquired with reference to the time when the entire property shall belong to me.

33 Idem libro nono quaestionum. Cum essent mihi et tibi fundi duo communes Titianus et Seianus et in divisione convenisset, ut mihi Titianus, tibi Seianus cederet, invicem partes eorum tradidimus et in tradendo dictum est, ut alteri per alterum aquam ducere liceret: recte esse servitutem impositam ait, maxime si pacto stipulatio subdita sit. 1Per plurium praedia aquam ducis quoquo modo imposita servitute: nisi pactum vel stipulatio etiam de hoc subsecuta est, neque eorum cuivis neque alii vicino poteris haustum ex rivo cedere: pacto enim vel stipulatione intervenientibus et hoc concedi solet, quamvis nullum praedium ipsum sibi servire neque servitutis fructus constitui potest.

33 The Same, Questions, Book IX. Where you and I held two tracts of land, the Titian and Seian Estates, in common, and in dividing the same it was agreed that the Titian Estate should belong to me, and the Seian to you, and we conveyed our respective shares to one another, and in doing so it was stated that each one should be allowed to conduct water through the land of the other; it was held that the servitude was properly established, especially if a stipulation was added to the contract. 1You conduct water through the land of several persons. No matter in what way the servitude was created, unless an agreement was entered into, or a stipulation made with reference to it, you cannot grant to any of the owners, or to any neighbors the right to draw water from channels, but where an agreement or a stipulation was entered into, it is usual for this to be granted; although no land can be the subject of a servitude in favor of itself, nor can the usufruct of a servitude be created.

34 Papinianus libro septimo quaestionum. Unus ex sociis fundi communis permittendo ius esse ire agere nihil agit: et ideo si duo praedia, quae mutuo serviebant, inter eosdem fuerint communicata, quoniam servitutes pro parte retineri placet, ab altero servitus alteri remitti non potest: quamvis enim unusquisque sociorum solus sit, cui servitus debetur, tamen quoniam non personae, sed praedia deberent, neque adquiri libertas neque remitti servitus per partem poterit. 1Si fons exaruerit, ex quo ductum aquae habeo isque post constitutum tempus ad suas venas redierit, an aquae ductus amissus erit, quaeritur:

34 Papinianus, Questions, Book VII. If one joint-owner of a tract of land permits anyone to have a right to walk or drive over it, the grant is void, and therefore if two tracts, which are servient to one another, become the common property of the owners, then, since it is established that servitudes can be retained with reference to a share, the servitude cannot be released by one of the parties to the other; although each joint-owner to whom a servitude is due enjoys the right in severalty; still, since it is not the persons but the estates which are subject to the servitudes, freedom cannot be acquired, nor can a servitude be released with reference to a part of an estate. 1Where a spring from which I have the right to conduct water dries up, and after the time fixed by law for the extinction of the servitude, it begins to flow again, the question arises whether the right to convey the water is lost?

35 Paulus libro quinto decimo ad Plautium. et Atilicinus ait Caesarem Statilio Tauro rescripsisse in haec verba: ‘Hi, qui ex fundo Sutrino aquam ducere soliti sunt, adierunt me proposueruntque aquam, qua per aliquot annos usi sunt ex fonte, qui est in fundo Sutrino, ducere non potuisse, quod fons exaruisset, et postea ex eo fonte aquam fluere coepisse: petieruntque a me, ut quod ius non neglegentia aut culpa sua amiserant, sed quia ducere non poterant, his restitueretur. quorum mihi postulatio cum non iniqua visa sit, succurrendum his putavi. itaque quod ius habuerunt tunc, cum primum ea aqua pervenire ad eos non potuit, id eis restitui placet.’

35 Paulus, On Plautius, Book XV. And Atilicinus says that the Emperor made the following statement in a Rescript to Statillus Taurus: “Those who were accustomed to obtain water from the Sutrine Estate appeared before me, and said that they were unable to conduct the water from the spring on the Sutrine Estate which they had used for several years, because the spring had dried up; and that afterwards the water began to flow from said spring, and they petitioned me that, as they had lost their right through no negligence of their own, but because they could not obtain the water, it might be restored to them. As their request did not seem to be unjust, I though that relief should be granted. It is therefore decreed that the right which they had on the first day when they could not succeed in obtaining water shall be restored to them.”

36 Idem libro secundo responsorum. Cum fundo, quem ex duobus retinuit venditor, aquae ducendae servitus imposita sit, empto praedio quaesita servitus distractum denuo praedium sequitur: nec ad rem pertinet, quod stipulatio, qua poenam promitti placuit, ad personam emptoris, si ei forte frui non licuisset, relata est.

36 The Same, Opinions, Book II. When a vendor retains one of two estates, and a servitude for the conduct of water is imposed upon it by him, the servitude acquired for the estate which is purchased will follow the same if a sale is afterwards made; nor does it matter whether the stipulation by which it was agreed that a penalty should be promised had reference to the person of the purchaser, and made certain provisions in the event that he should not be permitted to enjoy the servitude.

37 Idem libro tertio responsorum. Λούκιος Τίτιος Γαΐῳ Σεΐῳ τῷ ἀδελφῷ πλεῖστα χαίρειν. ὕδατος τοῦ ῥέοντος εἰς τὴν κρήνην τὴν κατασκευασθεῖσαν ἐν ἰσθμῷ ὑπὸ τοῦ πατρόσ μου δίδωμι καὶ χαρίζομαί σοι δάκτυλον εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν σου τὴν ἐν τῷ ἰσθμῷ, ἢ ὅπου δ’ ἄν βούλῃ. quaero, an ex hac scriptura usus aquae etiam ad heredes Gaii Seii pertineat. Paulus respondit usum aquae personalem ad heredem Seii quasi usuarii transmitti non oportere.

37 The Same, Opinions, Book III. “Lucius Titius to his brother Gaius Seius, Greeting: Of the water which flows into the reservoir which my father built on the isthmus, I give and grant to you gratuitously the depth of an inch, to be conducted either into the house which you have on said isthmus, or anywhere else you may wish”. I ask whether by these terms the use of the water also belongs to the heirs of Gaius Seius? Paulus answered that as the use of the water was personal, it could not be transmitted to the heirs of Seius, as they occupied the position of parties entitled to the use of the same.

38 Idem libro primo manualium. Flumine interveniente via constitui potest, si aut vado transiri potest aut pontem habeat: diversum, si pontonibus traiciatur. haec ita, si per unius praedia flumen currat: alioquin si tua praedia mihi vicina sint, deinde flumen, deinde Titii praedia, deinde via publica, in quam iter mihi adquiri volo, dispiciamus ne nihil vetet a te mihi viam dari usque ad flumen, deinde a Titio usque ad viam publicam. sed videamus, num et si tu eorum praediorum dominus sis, quae trans flumen intra viam publicam sint, idem iuris sit, quia via consummari solet vel civitate tenus vel usque ad viam publicam vel usque ad flumen, in quo pontonibus traiciatur vel usque ad proprium aliud eiusdem domini praedium: quod si est, non videtur interrrumpi servitus, quamvis inter eiusdem domini praedia flumen publicum intercedat.

38 The Same, Manuals, Book I. A right of way can be granted through a place where a river flows, if it can either be crossed by a ford or there is a bridge; but it is different where it must be crossed by ferry-boats. This is the case where the river runs through the land of one of the parties; but it is otherwise if your land joins mine, and then comes the river, and the land of Titius, and then a highway up to which I wish to acquire a right of way. Let us consider whether there is anything to prevent you from giving me a right of way as far as the river, and then my receiving one from Titius as far as the highway. Again, let us consider whether the same legal principle will apply even if you are the owner of the land which is beyond the river on this side of the highway; because a right of way can be complete as far as a town, or as a highway, or as a river which must be crossed by ferry-boats, or as far as the land belonging to the same owner. If this be the case the servitude is not held to be interrupted, even though a public river intervenes between two tracts of land belonging to the same person.