4 sionibus fecimus. Sed haec de his libertinis hodie dicenda sunt, qui in civitatem Romanam pervenerunt, cum nec sunt alii liberti simul et dediticiis et Latinis sublatis, cum Latinorum legitimae successiones nullae penitus erant, qui licet ut liberi vitam suam peragebant, attamen ipso ultimo spiritu simul animam atque libertatem amittebant, et quasi servorum ita bona eorum iure quodammodo peculii ex lege Iunia manumissores detinebant. postea vero senatus consulto Largiano cautum fuerat, ut liberi manumissoris non nominatim exheredati facti extraneis heredibus eorum in bonis Latinorum praeponerentur. quibus supervenit etiam divi Traiani edictum, quod eundem hominem, si invito vel ignorante patrono ad civitatem venire ex beneficio principis festinavit, faciebat vivum quidem civem Romanum, Latinum autem morientem. sed nostra constitutione propter huiusmodi condicionum vices et alias difficultates cum ipsis Latinis etiam legem Iuniam et senatus consultum Largianum et edictum divi Traiani in perpetuum deleri censuimus, ut omnes liberti civitate Romana fruantur, et mirabili modo quibusdam adiectionibus ipsas vias, quae in Latinitatem ducebant, ad civitatem Romanam capiendam transposuimus.

if it were disinherited, and they did not institute the patron or patroness in a third, clear of legacies and fideicommissa, the latter could demand possession of it contra tabulas.

(2) A libertus or liberta who died intestate was succeeded, in the first instance, by his or her natural descendants of either sex, irrespective of capitis deminutio, and whether they were born in slavery or not, so long as they were free at the parents' decease, Tit. 6. 10 supr.; in default of these, by the patron or patroness; thirdly, by the latter's children according to proximity, without regard to capitis deminutio; and lastly, by the patron or patroness' collaterals to the fifth degree.

§ 4. A patron who succeeded to the estate of his libertus civis took it quasi hereditario iure, practically as his nearest agnate; but he took that of his Latinus Iunianus, whom the lex Iunia Norbana had disabled from making a will, p. 244 supra, simply as his master, 'iure quodammodo peculii' Gaius iii. 56; it was regarded as so much potential property of the manumitter, devisable by him, along with the rest of his fortune, to whomsoever he pleased. The fact that a civis libertus died free, and was succeeded on intestacy by a relation or quasi-relation, while a Latinus died a slave, and was, properly speaking, not succeeded at all, accounts for the differences which existed in Gaius' time (iii. 57–62) between the devolutions of their respective properties. Thus, the right of succeeding

VIII.

DE ADSIGNATIONE LIBERTORUM.

In summa quod ad bona libertorum admonendi sumus senatum censuisse, ut quamvis ad omnes patroni liberos, qui eiusdem gradus sint, aequaliter bona libertorum pertineant, tamen liceret parenti uni ex liberis adsignare libertum, ut post mortem eius solus is patronus habeatur, cui adsignatus est, et ceteri liberi, qui ipsi quoque ad eadem bona nulla adsignatione interveniente pariter admitterentur, nihil iuris in his bonis habeant. sed ita demum pristinum ius recipiunt, si is cui adsignatus est decesserit nullis liberis relictis. Nec tantum 1 libertum, sed etiam libertam, et non tantum filio nepotive, sed etiam filiae neptive adsignare permittitur. Datur autem 2 haec adsignandi facultas ei, qui duos pluresve liberos in potestate habebit, ut eis, quos in potestate habet, adsignare ei libertum libertamve liceat. unde quaerebatur, si eum cui

to a libertus civis invariably descended to the patrons' children; that of taking the property of a Latinus belonged to his heres (Gaius iii. 58) : a libertus civis was succeeded by joint patrons in equal shares, though before his manumission they might have owned him in unequal proportions: 'bona vero Latinorum pro ea parte pertinent pro qua parte quisque eorum dominus fuit' (Gaius ib. 59). One patron of a civis excluded another patron's son, and so on, but the property of a Latinus went to one patron and another patron's heir in the ratio in which it would have belonged to the two patrons (ib. 60); between joint patrons of a civis there was accrual, 'bona autem Latini pro parte decedentis patroni caduca fiunt et ad populum pertinent' (ib. 62). The SC. Largianum, A.D. 42, enacted that where the patron of a Latinus instituted an extraneus heres, the right of taking his property upon his decease should belong to the patron's children so far as they were not expressly disinherited, Gaius ib. 67-71. For the attainment of civitas by a Latinus ex beneficio principis, to which the edict of Trajan related, cf. Gaius iii. 72, Ulpian, reg. 3. 2, and Mr. Poste's notes on Gaius i. 28-35.

The fate of the property of a deceased dediticius libertus had depended upon the mode of his manumission. If it had been such as would have made him a civis, were it not for the 'vitium' owing to which he necessarily became dediticius (p. 109, supra), the property devolved as though he actually were a civis libertus: if, except for the disqualification, it would have made him a Latinus, it devolved as though he actually were a Latinus, Gaius iii. 74–76.

Tit. VIII. This right of assignment modified the rule, that when a patron

adsignaverit postea emancipaverit, num evanescat adsignatio? sed placuit evanescere, quod et Iuliano et aliis plerisque visum 3 est. Nec interest, testamento quis adsignet an sine testamento: sed etiam quibuscumque verbis hoc patronis permittitur facere ex ipso senatus consulto, quod Claudianis temporibus factum est Suillo Rufo et Ostorio Scapula consulibus.

IX.

DE BONORUM POSSESSIONIBUS.

Ius bonorum possessionis introductum est a praetore emendandi veteris iuris gratia. nec solum in intestatorum hereditatibus vetus ius eo modo praetor emendavit, sicut supra dictum est, sed in eorum quoque, qui testamento facto decesserint. nam si alienus postumus heres fuerit institutus, quamvis hereditatem iure civili adire non poterat, cum institutio non valebat, honorario tamen iure bonorum possessor efficiebatur, videlicet cum a praetore adiuvabatur: sed et hic a nostra constitutione hodie recte heres instituitur, quasi 1 et iure civili non incognitus. Aliquando tamen neque emendandi neque impugnandi veteris iuris, sed magis confirmandi gratia pollicetur bonorum possessionem. nam illis

died his rights of succeeding to his liberti cives passed to all his children who were not capite minuti in equal proportions, by enabling him to give to any one or more of those in his power a preference over the rest in relation to all or any of his freedmen: 'adsignare libertum hoc est testificari, cuius ex liberi libertum esse voluit' Dig. 50. 16. 107. It became a question among the jurists whether such an assignment might be made to an emancipated child, and in Dig. 38. 4. 9 Modestinus says the better opinion was in the affirmative: but under Justinian the law seems to have been otherwise: ἐμαγκιπάτῳ γὰρ ἀδσιγνατεύειν οὐ δυνατόν Theoph. So limited, the practice shows clearly that if the patron or his children succeeded the libertus at all, they did so as his nearest agnates: if they or he were capite minuti, the agnatic tie was broken, and the right of succession lost : hence the rule that a freedman could not give himself in adrogation, Dig. 1. 7. 15. 3.

Tit. IX. For the institution of postumi alieni see on Bk. ii. 20. 28

supr.

§ 1. For bonorum possessio secundum tabulas see on Bk. ii. 17. 6 supr. for the succession of sui, Tit. I supr.: of agnates, Tit. 2.

quoque, qui recte facto testamento heredes instituti sunt, dat secundum tabulas bonorum possessionem: item ab intestato suos heredes et adgnatos ad bonorum possessionem vocat: sed et remota quoque bonorum possessione ad eos hereditas pertinet iure civili. Quos autem praetor solus vocat ad 2 hereditatem, heredes quidem ipso iure non fiunt (nam praetor heredem facere non potest: per legem enim tantum vel similem iuris constitutionem heredes fiunt, veluti per senatus consultum et constitutiones principales): sed cum eis praetor dat bonorum possessionem, loco heredum constituuntur et vocantur bonorum possessores. adhuc autem et alios complures gradus praetor fecit in bonorum possessionibus dandis, dum id agebat, ne quis sine successore moriatur: nam angustissimis finibus constitutum per legem duodecim tabularum ius percipiendarum hereditatum praetor ex bono et aequo dilatavit. Sunt autem bonorum possessiones ex tes- 3 tamento quidem hae. prima, quae praeteritis liberis datur vocaturque contra tabulas. secunda, quam omnibus iure scriptis heredibus praetor pollicetur ideoque vocatur secundum tabulas. et cum de testamentis prius locutus est, ad intestatos transitum fecit. et primo loco suis heredibus et his, qui ex edicto praetoris suis connumerantur, dat bonorum possessionem quae vocatur unde liberi: secundo legitimis heredibus: tertio decem personis, quas extraneo manumissori praeferebat (sunt autem decem personae hae: pater mater, avus avia tam

§ 3. The principal cases of bonorum possessio contra tabulas have been already pointed out on Bk. ii. 13. 3 supr. Possession of goods was awarded on intestacy to eight different classes of persons, in the following order of priority, each being known by a technical name derived from its place in the edict :

(1) Liberi see on Tit. 1. 9 supr.

(2) Legitimi see on Tit. 2. 4 supr. In succession to freedmen, this class consisted originally only of the patron, his children who had not been capite minuti, and the patroness: how it was modified by the SC. Tertullianum and Orfitianum has been noticed on Tits. 3 and 4 supr.

(3) Decem personae: this class relates only to succession to an emancipatus; under the old law, when the final act of manumission was performed by the extraneous vendee (p. 137 supra) the latter was postponed by the praetor to all the deceased's cognates in the ascending and descending lines within the second degree.

(4) The cognates according to proximity, Tit. 5 supr.

paterni quam materni, item filius filia, nepos neptis tam ex filio quam ex filia, frater soror sive consanguinei sive uterini):

(5) Tum quam ex familia: the patron or patroness's nearest collateral agnates.

(6) Patronus, patrona, liberi et parentes eorum: i. e. the patron's or patroness's own patron or patroness, and his or her cognates in the direct line.

(7) Vir et uxor : the surviving consort of the deceased, who by the civil law had no right of succession whatever.

(8) The collateral cognates of the patron within the sixth degree, Tit. 5. 5 supr. In the extremely improbable event of there being no one belonging to even the lowest of these classes to take bonorum possessio, the estate escheated to the aerarium (later to the fiscus): 'si nemo sit, ad quem bonorum possessio pertinere possit, aut sit quidem, sed ius suum omiserit, populo bona deferuntur ex lege Iulia caducaria,' Ulpian, reg. 28. 7.

It will be observed that, besides class 3, which related to what cannot ever have been a very common case, classes 5, 6, and 8 did not come into consideration unless the intestate were a freedman or a freedwoman. Class 3 became meaningless under Justinian's new system of emancipation, and the other three he altogether abolished. Thus in his legislation intestate bonorum possessores were arranged in four classes only, their order being-liberi, legitimi, cognati, vir et uxor ; but he also retained an anomalous group (§ 8 inf.), called sometimes for the sake of brevity 'tum quibus ex legibus,' comprising those persons to whom the statute law had enacted that bonorum possessio (as distinct from the hereditas) should be given: e. g. the patron in concurrence with the children of a libertus under the lex Papia Poppaea, Tit. 7. 1 and 2 supr: 'quippe cum non alias huic competit bonorum possessio, quam si lex specialiter deferat bonorum possessionem' Dig. 38. 14. I. 2.

For a discussion of the probable origin of bonorum possessio, and of its development into an organized scheme of succession, see Excursus IV, at the end of this Book. A little more is necessary in order to thoroughly understand its nature.

In order to obtain possession of property belonging to the deceased, the bonorum possessor had, as such, a special procedure, the interdict Quorum bonorum (Dig. 43. 2. 1.-pr., Gaius iv. 144), which had certain advantages over the remedy available to the heres, qua heres (viz. hereditatis petitio, by which he established his title to the universitas iuris). Thus, the interdict was never excluded by usucapio lucrativa (p. 221 supr. cf. Gaius ii. 52-58), and availed also against persons 'qui dolo desierant possidere:' hereditatis petitio was not thus privileged until the time of Hadrian, Dig. 5. 3. 20. 6-21, ib. 25. pr.-17. It is then no matter for surprise that heirs, who had an unimpeachable civil title, applied for bonorum possessio secundum tabulas in order to be able to use the interdict, § 1 supr., Gaius iii. 34; and similarly, as the heir could claim to become bonorum possessor, so the praetor treated the bonorum possessor