The Same, On the Edict, Book LXXIII. The guardian does not cease to hold his office under these circumstances. This is the law with reference to all guardians who are temporarily excused.

Paulus, On the Edict, Book LXXIII. Prætorian stipulations either involve the restitution of the property, or an indeterminate amount, 1As, for instance, the stipulation with reference to notice of a new work, whereby it is provided that everything shall be restored to its former condition. Therefore, whether the plaintiff or the defendant dies, leaving several heirs; and whether either of them gains, or loses the case, everything must be restored to its former condition; for as long as anything remains it cannot appear that complete restitution has been made. 2A stipulation involves an indeterminate amount, when an agreement is made that the judgment shall be paid; that the principal will ratify what has been done; that injury will not be caused; and other things of this kind. With reference to these, it can be said that they are divided among the heirs, although it may be maintained that a stipulation made by the deceased, and which descends from him, cannot, in the persons of his heirs, render their condition different. But, on the other hand, it is perfectly reasonable that if one of the heirs of the stipulator gains his case, the stipulation will become operative, so far as his share is concerned; since this is caused by the words of the stipulation: “As much as the property is worth.” If, however, one of the heirs of the promisor is in possession of the entire property, Julianus says that judgment must be rendered against him in full. It may be doubted whether he himself, as well as his sureties, are liable under the stipulation, or even liable at all; and it is a question whether the stipulation becomes operative. If the possessor should die after issue has been joined, one of the heirs ought not to have judgment rendered against him for a larger share than he is entitled to from the estate, even though he may be in possession of all the land.

Paulus, On the Edict, Book LXXIII. It must be remembered that, by the term “heir,” several successors are understood. For the term “heir” only refers to the next heir in very few instances, for example, in a pupillary substitution made as follows, “Whoever shall be my heir, let him also be my son’s heir,” for in this case, the heir of the heir is not included, because he is uncertain. Likewise, according to the Lex Ælia Sentia, the son who is the next heir can accuse a paternal freedman of being ungrateful, but he could not do so if he was the heir of the heir. The same rule applies to the right to exact services from a freedman, as a son who is the heir can demand them, but not if he has been removed from the succession. The following words, “The person to whom the property belongs,” are understood to refer to an heir who has succeeded to the entire ownership of the estate, either under the Civil or the Prætorian Law.