Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. A son adopted by a Senator continues to be such as long as he remains in his family; but when he is emancipated, then by the emancipation he loses the name of son. 1When a son is given in adoption by a Senator to a person of inferior rank he is always considered the son of a Senator; because the Senatorial dignity is not lost by an adoption arising from an inferior station, any more than anyone would cease to be of consular dignity under similar circumstances.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. It is provided by the Lex Julia having reference to public prosecutions, that a man, if unwilling, cannot be compelled to give testimony in court against his father-in-law, his son-in-law, his step-father, his stepson, his cousin, whether male or female, his cousin’s child, or any of those who are related in a nearer degree. Nor can the freedman of anyone, or of his children, his parents, his or her wife or husband, be permitted to testify against him, if he is accused. The same rule applies to a patron, and a patroness, for neither of them can be compelled to give testimony against their freedman, nor a freedman against his patron.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. The daughter of a Senator who has lived in prostitution, or has exercised the calling of an actress, or has been convicted of a criminal offence, can marry a freedman with impunity; for she who has been guilty of such depravity is no longer worthy of honor.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. In this instance, the slave ceases to be a part of the dowry, as where anyone is permitted to donate a slave for the purpose of manumitting him, it is the same as if the slave was donated, because permission was given to manumit him.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. The value of property should be estimated, not by affection nor according to any particular advantage attaching to it, but for what it can be disposed of at an ordinary sale. For where a father is in possession of a slave who is his natural son, he is none the more wealthy because, if the slave was in the possession of another person, he would be willing to pay a larger sum to recover him than someone else. Nor will he who has possession of the natural son of another be considered to have the value of the price for which he could sell him to his father, since the prospective time of his sale ought not to be considered, but his value at present; and not the fact that he is the son of someone else, but what he is worth as a slave. The same rule applies to a slave who has caused some damage, for no one becomes any more valuable for having committed an offence. Pedius says that a slave who has been appointed an heir after the death of his master is no more valuable for the reason that he will bring more at a sale; for it is absurd to suppose that where I have been appointed an heir, I am any the richer before I accept the estate, or where my slave is appointed an heir, that I immediately become more wealthy, as there may be many reasons why he should not accept the estate by my order. It is certain that he will acquire the estate for me when he does enter upon it, but it is preposterous to assume that we become enriched thereby before we obtain the property. 1Where a debtor of the testator is not solvent, the claim is only considered to be worth what can be collected from him. 2Places and times occasionally cause a difference in the price of property, for oil does not sell at the same price in Rome that it does in Spain, nor has it the same value in continuous bad years that it has in favorable ones; hence, under such circumstances, the value of articles should not be fixed by their scarcity at certain periods, nor on account of something which rarely occurs.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. A freedwoman, who is more than fifty years of age, is not compelled to render services to her patron.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. “A freedman who has two or more male or female children under his control (exclusive of any who may have adopted the profession of buffoon, or have hired themselves to fight with wild beasts), will not be required to render their patron or patroness, or the children of the latter any services, or to make them any donation or present, or to do anything else which they have agreed to furnish, bestow, or perform, in consideration of freedom, with reference to which they have sworn, promised, or bound themselves; 1and if the said freedman should not, at the same time, have two children under his control, but only one of the age of five years, he shall be released from the obligation of performing services.” 1aJulianus says that the death of children is an advantage to a freedman, as releasing him from services subsequently imposed. 2If, after having lost a child, the freedman binds himself to render services to his patron and another child is afterwards born, Pomponius says that there is all the more reason for the child who is. dead to be joined with the living one, in order to release the freedman from liability. 3It makes no difference whether the freedman promises his services to the patron himself, or to those who are under his control. 4Ad Dig. 38,1,37,4Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. II, § 355, Note 8.If the patron should assign the services of his freedman to a creditor, the same rule cannot be said to apply; for this assignment is made instead of a payment. It may, however, be said that the freedman can be released by the above-mentioned law, if the patron has assigned the services to another, after the freedman has promised them; for it is true that he promised them to his patron, although he no longer owes them to him. But if in the beginning, the freedman should promise his services on account of the assignment of his patron, he will not be released. 5The release from the rendition of services not only has reference to those to be performed in the future, but also to such as are already due. 6Julianus says that even if suit has already been brought to compel the performance of services, a release will take place if children should be born. Where, however, a decision has been rendered for services to be performed, the freedman cannot be released, as he has begun to owe a sum of money. 7A posthumous child does not discharge the heirs of his father from liability, because the release should be derived from the freedman, and no one can be considered to be discharged after death. But children born before the death of the freedman will cause a release under the above-mentioned law. 8According to the spirit of the said law, even if the release has special reference to the person of the freedman, his sureties will also be discharged. If, however, the freedman should furnish a debtor as his substitute, this will be of no advantage to him.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. A child is not considered a year old as soon as it is born, but is said to be of that age after three hundred and sixty-five days have elapsed, if the last day has begun, but is not completed; because, according to the Civil Law, we reckon the year, not by moments, but by days.

Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book II. A woman who has brought forth three children at a birth is considered to have had three parturitions.