Julianus, Digest, Book XXIII. The Prætor does not promise possession of the property of an estate in opposition to the terms of the will, under the condition that collation shall be made, but he shows what must be done after possession has been given. Otherwise, great advantage would be taken of an emancipated son, if he was not understood to have obtained prætorian possession of the estate, unless he had given security to make collation; for if, in the meantime, he himself should die, he would leave nothing to his heir. Moreover, if his brother should die, he will not be permitted to obtain prætorian possession of the estate. What should be done under such circumstances? It must then be held that he obtained legal possession of the estate, even before he gave security; but if he should not give security, the result will be that the entire estate will go to the son under paternal control. 1An emancipated son entered into a controversy with a minor under the age of puberty, who declared that he was his brother, and was under the control of his father. I ask whether the emancipated son should make collation of his property with him. Paulus remarks on this point: “I think that collation should be made, after a bond has been required that, if the minor loses the case, he will transfer the estate as well as the property of which collation was made.” 2Julianus: Whenever prætorian possession is given contrary to the provisions of the will, the emancipated sons should make collation of their property only with those who remain under the control of their father. The question arises how this can be done. For, if the property left by the father, as well as that belonging to the emancipated sons, is placed in one mass, and full shares of the same are taken, the result will be that the emancipated sons will profit by the collation made by themselves. Therefore, let us see whether it will not be more convenient for the emancipated sons to receive a fourth of their father’s estate, and a third of their own property. What I mean will become more plain by an example. Let us suppose that a father left four hundred aurei, and two sons under his control, and two have been emancipated. Of these one will have a hundred and the other sixty aurei out of his estate; the one who will be entitled to a hundred will obtain in all a hundred and thirty-three and a third; and he who contributed sixty will obtain a hundred and twenty, so that the result will be that those only who remained under the control of their father will obtain the benefit of the collation. 3Emancipated sons are ordered to place their property in collation with those who are under the control of their father. 4Wherefore, as he who is under the control of his father receives the dowry of his wife as a preferred legacy, so, also, can an emancipated son retain that of his wife as a preferred legacy. 5Where an emancipated son, who was passed over in a will, gives security with reference to the collation of his property, while he is deliberating whether he will demand prætorian possession of the estate or not, and he does not do so, and his brother brings suit against him on the stipulation, he will be secure under the will. If, however, he has deposited money by way of collation, he can recover it by an action; for, after he has declined to apply for prætorian possession, there will be no reason for the money to remain in the hands of the heir. 6A man who had two sons under his control, and also a grandson who was the son of one of them, emancipated the one by whom he had the grandson; and, after having been emancipated, the son had another son whom his grandfather adopted in his stead; and then the grandfather died, either intestate, or after making a will in which his emancipated son was passed over. The question arose, what would the rule be with reference to prætorian possession, and what ought to be done with respect to collation? The answer was that, so far as the property was concerned, three parts should be made of it, one of which would belong to the son who remained under paternal control, the second to the grandson who was adopted instead of the son, and the third to the emancipated son and the grandson who remained under paternal control; so that the father would be liable to collation only with the one who had obtained prætorian possession of the estate.