Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. Where the usufruct of a flock is bequeathed, and the number of the same is reduced to such a point that it cannot be considered a flock, the usufruct terminates.

Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. Not only is that peculium which an owner has granted to his slave, but also whatever has been acquired without his knowledge, but which, if he had known of it, he would have permitted to be in the peculium. 1If my slave, without my knowledge, transacts my business, he will be considered to be my debtor to the same extent as he would have been liable, if, being a freeman, he had attended to it. 2In order that a slave may be considered a debtor to the master or the master to the slave, attention must be paid to the regulations of the Civil Law; and therefore, if the master has stated in his account that he is indebted to his slave, when, in fact, neither had he borrowed money, nor had any other cause for debt previously existed, the mere statement of account does not render him a debtor.

Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. The term peculium must sometimes be employed even if the slave has ceased to exist in the course of nature, and the Prætor grants an action on the peculium within a year; for, in this instance also, both increase and diminution are to be taken into consideration, as belonging to the peculium, although it has ceased to exist, as such, through the death or manumission of the slave; so that there may be an accession to it as to a peculium, by crops, or by the yield of flocks, or by the offspring of female slaves, and a diminution, as, for instance, where an animal has died, or has been lost in any other way.

The Same, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. Where several heirs were appointed, and the legacy was bequeathed as follows, “Let my heir be charged with the payment of five aurei,” not any one heir, but all of them together, are considered to be charged with the payment of five aurei. 1Where a legacy was bequeathed in the following terms, “Let Lucius Titius, my heir, be charged with the payment of five aurei to Tithasus,” and then, in another place in the will, it was provided, “Let Publius Mævius, my heir, be charged with the payment of five aurei to Tithasus,” unless Titius can prove that Publius has been charged with the payment of the legacy for the purpose of releasing him, the legatee will be entitled to receive five aurei from each of the heirs.

Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. There is no difference between the expressions garments for men, and clothing for men, but the intention of the testator sometimes creates difficulty, if he himself was accustomed to make use of some garment which was also suitable for women. Therefore it should, by all means, be ascertained whether the garment bequeathed was the one which the testator had in his mind, and not that which was actually destined for the use of women, or for men. For Quintus Mucius says that he knew a certain Senator who was in the habit of wearing women’s clothing at the table, and who, if he should bequeath a garment used by women, would not be considered to have had in his mind one which he himself was accustomed to make use of, as if it was one suitable for his sex.

Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. A simple statement in an account does not render anyone a debtor; for instance, if we wish to make a donation to a freeman, we can make the statement in our account that we owe it, but no donation is understood to be made.

The Same, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. If I stipulate for ten aurei for myself and Titius, when I am not under his control, ten aurei will not be due to me, but only five, as the other half will be deducted; for when I have improperly stipulated for the benefit of a stranger my share will not be increased to that extent. 1Ad Dig. 45,1,110,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 84, Note 11.If I stipulate with you as follows, “Do you promise to give me any women’s clothing which belongs to you?” the intention of the stipulator rather than that of the promisor should be taken into account, and attention should be paid to whatever was in existence, and not to what the promisor had in his mind at the time. Therefore, if the promisor was accustomed to wear a woman’s garment, it will still be due.

Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book IV. An obligation can be discharged in the same way in which it was contracted. Hence, when we have made an agreement with reference to any property, it should be discharged by the transfer of the thing itself, as, for instance, when we lend some article to be consumed, and its value in money is to be given in return; and where we have contracted for anything orally, the obligation should be discharged by the delivery of the article, or by words. By words, when the promisor is given a release; by the delivery of the article, when what was promised is given. Likewise, where a purchase, sale, or lease, is effected, if this is done by mere consent, the contract can be dissolved by a contrary agreement.