Ad Sabinum libri
Ex libro IV
Dig. 23,2,5Idem libro quarto ad Sabinum. Mulierem absenti per litteras eius vel per nuntium posse nubere placet, si in domum eius deduceretur: eam vero quae abesset ex litteris vel nuntio suo duci a marito non posse: deductione enim opus esse in mariti, non in uxoris domum, quasi in domicilium matrimonii.
The Same, On Sabinus, Book IV. It is settled that a woman can be married to a man who is absent either by means of a letter, or through a messenger, if she is afterwards conducted to his house. If she remains absent, however, she cannot be married, either by letter or by messenger; for she must be brought, not to her own house, but to that of her husband, since this is, as it were, the domicile of matrimony.
Dig. 28,6,17Idem libro quarto ad Sabinum. Substitui liberis is etiam potest, qui post mortem eius natus fuerit, cui substitutus heres fuerit.
The Same, On Sabinus, Book IV. Anyone can be substituted for a child, even though he should be born after the death of the child for whom he was substituted as heir.
Dig. 30,13Idem libro quarto ad Sabinum. Cum incertus homo legatus tibi esset, heres Stichum servo tuo tradidit. Neratius respondit, si voluntate domini tradidit vel ratum hoc dominus habuerit, perinde eum liberatum, atque si Stichus legatus esset.
The Same, On Sabinus, Book IV. Where a slave, insufficiently described, was left to you, and the heir delivered Stichus to your slave, Neratius was of the opinion that if the delivery was made with the consent of the master, or he ratified the act, the heir will be released, just as if Stichus himself had been bequeathed.
Dig. 37,4,16Pomponius libro quarto ad Sabinum. Si emancipatus filius nepoti in potestate avi relicto ab extraneo herede fideicommissam hereditatem, si liberatus avi potestate fuisset, reliquisset: si suspectus avus sit quasi consumpturus bona nepotis, non esse ei dandam bonorum possessionem.
Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book IV. If an emancipated son should leave his son under the control of the grandfather of the latter, and charge a foreign heir under a trust to transfer his estate to him, if he should be released from the control of his grandfather, possession of the estate ought not to be given to the grandfather by the Prætorian Law, if there was reason to think that he would waste the property of the grandson.
Dig. 38,1,4Idem libro quarto ad Sabinum. A duobus manumissus utrique operas promiserat: altero ex his mortuo nihil est, quare non filio eius, quamvis superstite altero, operarum detur petitio. nec hoc quicquam commune habet cum hereditate aut bonorum possessione: perinde enim operae a libertis ac pecunia credita petitur. haec ita Aristo scripsit, cuius sententiam puto veram: nam etiam praeteritarum operarum actionem dari heredi extraneo sine metu exceptionis placet. dabitur igitur et vivo altero patrono.
The Same, On Sabinus, Book IV. A slave who was manumitted by two masters promised his services to both. One of them having died, there is no reason why a demand for the services of the slave should not be made by his son, even though the other master may be living. This has nothing in common with the succession to, or prætorian possession of an estate; as services are demanded from freedmen just as if money had been lent to them. This was the opinion of Aristo, and I think it to be correct; for it is held that an action should be granted to a foreign heir for services which were due but not performed, without the fear of his being barred by an exception; and therefore, it should be granted to the son, even if the other patron is living.
Dig. 38,2,2Pomponius libro quarto ad Sabinum. Si patronus a liberto praeteritus bonorum possessionem petere potuerit contra tabulas et antequam peteret decesserit vel dies ei bonorum possessionis agnoscendae praeterierit, liberi eius vel alterius patroni petere poterunt ex illa parte edicti, qua, primis non petentibus aut etiam nolentibus ad se pertinere, sequentibus datur, atque si priores ex eo numero non essent. 1Sed si patronus heres institutus vivo liberto decessisset superstitibus liberis, quaesitum est, an illi contra tabulas testamenti bonorum possessionem petere possint: et eo decursum est, ut mortis tempus, quo defertur bonorum possessio, spectari debeat, an patronus non sit, ut, si sit, ex prima parte edicti liberi eius bonorum possessionem petere non possint. 2Si filius emancipatus nepotem in potestate avi reliquisset, bonorum possessionem partis dimidiae dandam ei filio intestati liberti, quamvis iure ipso legitima hereditas ad nepotem pertineat, quia et contra tabulas eius liberti filio potius bonorum possessio partis debitae daretur.
Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book IV. If a patron, who was passed over in the will of his freedman, could demand prætorian possession of his estate contrary to the provisions of the will, and before doing so, died, or the time prescribed for demanding said possession has elapsed, his children, or those of another patron, can demand possession under that Section of the Edict by which when the first parties do not claim possession, or are unwilling to claim it, it is granted to those next in succession, just as if the former were not in existence. 1If a patron, who was appointed heir by his freedman, should die during the lifetime of the latter, leaving children, the question arose whether they could demand prætorian possession of the estate of the freedman, contrary to the provisions of the will. It was decided with reference to this point that the time of death, to which prætorian possession is referred, should be considered in order to ascertain whether there is any patron or not; so that, if there is one, his children cannot demand prætorian possession under the First Section of the Edict. 2If an emancipated son should leave a grandson under the control of his grandfather, prætorian possession of half of the property of the intestate freedman ought to be given to the son, although the estate may, by operation of law, belong to the grandson; for the reason that possession of the part which was due should be granted to the son contrary to the provisions of the will of the freedman.
Dig. 38,6,5Pomponius libro quarto ad Sabinum. Si quis ex his, quibus bonorum possessionem praetor pollicetur, in potestate parentis, de cuius bonis agitur, cum is moritur, non fuerit, ei liberisque, quos in eiusdem familia habebit, si ad eos hereditas suo nomine pertinebit neque nominatim exheredes scripti erunt, bonorum possessio eius partis datur, quae ad eum pertineret, si in potestate permansisset, ita, ut ex ea parte dimidiam habeat, reliquum liberi eius, hisque dumtaxat bona sua conferat. 1Sed et si filium et nepotem ex eo pater emancipaverit, filius solus veniet ad bonorum possessionem, quamvis capitis deminutio per edictum nulli obstet. quin etiam hi quoque, qui in potestate numquam fuerunt nec sui heredis locum optinuerunt, vocantur ad bonorum possessionem parentium. nam si filius emancipatus reliquerit in potestate avi nepotem, dabitur ei, qui in potestate relictus sit, patris emancipati bonorum possessio: et si post emancipationem procreaverit, ita nato dabitur avi bonorum possessio, scilicet non obstante ei patre suo. 2Si filius emancipatus non petierit bonorum possessionem, ita integra sunt omnia nepotibus, atque si filius non fuisset, ut quod filius habiturus esset petita bonorum possessione, hoc nepotibus ex eo solis, non etiam reliquis adcrescat.
Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book IV. Where one of those children to whom the Prætor promises the possession of an estate is not under the control of the parent whose property was in dispute at the time of his death, the possession of that share of the estate to which he would have been entitled if he had remained under paternal control is granted to him, and to his children who were under the control of the deceased, if the estate belonged to him in his own name and they were not specifically disinherited; so that he himself will only have half of said share, and the other half will be given to his children, and he can distribute his own property among them alone, without any restriction. 1If a father should emancipate his son and his grandson by the latter, the son alone will be entitled to the possession of his estate on the ground of intestacy, although the loss of civil rights would not be an obstacle to anyone in distributing the estate under the Edict. Moreover, those children who have never been under paternal control, and have not obtained the place of proper heirs, are called to the prætorian possession of the estate of their parents; for if an emancipated son should leave a grandson under the control of his grandfather, prætorian possession of the estate of the emancipated father shall be given to the child who remains under the control of his grandfather; and, if the latter should have been begotten after the emancipation of his father, prætorian possession of the estate of his grandfather will be given to him after his birth; provided the condition of his father offers no obstacle to this being done. 2If an emancipated son should not demand prætorian possession of an estate on the ground of intestacy, all of the rights of the grandsons will remain unimpaired, just as if there had been no son; and what the son would have been entitled to if he had demanded prætorian possession of the estate of his father on the ground of intestacy will accrue to the grandsons alone who are descendants of the said son, and not to any others.
Dig. 38,8,5Pomponius libro quarto ad Sabinum. Legitimis capite deminutis non datur bonorum possessio iure heredis legitimi, quia non eadem causa eorum est, quae liberorum: sed gradu cognatorum rursus vocantur.
Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book IV. Prætorian possession based on the right of legal inheritance is not granted to such heirs at law as have lost their civil rights, because their position is not the same as that of children; but such heirs are then called to the succession as belonging to the degree of cognates.
Dig. 38,16,4Pomponius libro quarto ad Sabinum. Hi, quorum parens capite minutus est, legitimae hereditatis ius et in ceteris personis et inter se retinent et alii adversus eos.
Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book IV. Children, the civil status of whose father has been altered, retain the right of inheritance, both with reference to other persons and among themselves, and vice versa.
Dig. 48,22,1Pomponius libro quarto ad Sabinum. Caput ex rescripto divi Traiani ad Didium Secundum: ‘Scio relegatorum bona avaritia superiorum temporum fisco vindicata. sed aliud clementiae meae convenit, qui inter cetera, quibus innocentiam rationum mearum temporum, hoc quoque remisi exemplum’.
Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book IV. The beginning of the Rescript of the Divine Trajan to Didius Secundus is as follows: “I am aware that the property of persons who have been relegated has been confiscated to the Treasury by the avarice of former ages, but a different course is agreeable to my clemency, as I wish to give this additional example to show that I have favored innocence during my reign.”
Dig. 50,17,8Idem libro quarto ad Sabinum. Iura sanguinis nullo iure civili dirimi possunt.
The Same, On Sabinus, Book IV. The rights of blood cannot be annulled by any Civil Law.