Ulpianus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book VII. Where, however, a husband who is transacting the business of his wife, with her consent, manumits a dotal slave, with her permission, he must restore to his wife whatever may have come into his hands through the said slave. 1If he imposes any conditions upon the slave in consideration of his freedom, he must be responsible for this to his wife. 2It is evident if any services should be performed by the freedman for the husband, and no appraisement of them should be made, it will not be just for the husband to pay anything to the wife on this account. 3But if any charge was imposed upon the freedman after manumission, this must be accounted for to the wife. 4Where, however, the freedman is the debtor of the husband, or has rendered himself liable for any other obligation, he must assign the claim which he holds against him to his wife. 5He is also compelled to deliver to his wife any of the property of the freedman, which may come into his hands, provided he acquired it in the capacity of patron. If, however, he acquires it in any other way, he is not compelled to transfer it, for he is not liable to his wife for anything which the freedman gives to him gratuitously, but only for what he acquires, or can acquire under his rights as patron. It is evident that if he is appointed heir by the freedman to the greater portion of the debt which the latter owes him, he will not be responsible for the excess; and if the freedman should constitute him his heir when he is not indebted to him, he will not be bound to give anything to his wife. 6He must, however (as the law declares), give “whatever may come into his hands”. We understand this to mean whatever he collects, or can collect, because a right of action to do so is granted him. 7It is added in the law that the husband shall be liable where he has committed any fraudulent act to prevent the property from coming into his hands. 8If a patron disinherits his son, and the property of the freedman should be obtained by the latter, it must be considered whether the heir will be liable on this ground. And, also, where nothing comes into the hands of the patron himself, or into the hands of his heir, how can be become liable on this account? 9The law only speaks of the husband and his heir. Nothing is mentioned in it with reference to a father-in-law and his successors; and Labeo notices this as having been omitted. In these instances, therefore, the law is defective, and not even a prætorian action can be granted. 10Where the law says that the husband shall give up the money which he has received, it is evident that it did not intend that he should surrender the estate itself, but only the value of the same, or of the property of the freedman; unless the husband should prefer to surrender the property itself, and this should be admitted as the more favorable construction.

Ulpianus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book VII. Houses are considered to be built at Rome when they are erected contiguous to the city. 1He is considered to have finished a house who has completed it so that it can be occupied.