5 posita est. Rursus ex diverso si quis, cum rei publicae causa abesset vel in hostium potestate esset, rem eius qui in civitate esset usu ceperit, permittitur domino, si possessor rei publicae causa abesse desierit, tunc intra annum rescissa usucapione eam petere, id est ita petere, ut dicat possessorem usu non cepisse et ob id suam esse rem. quod genus actionis et aliis quibusdam simili aequitate motus praetor accommodat, sicut ex latiore digestorum seu pandectarum volumine intellegere 6 licet. Item si quis in fraudem creditorum rem suam alicui tradiderit, bonis eius a creditoribus ex sententia praesidis possessis permittitur ipsis creditoribus rescissa traditione eam rem petere, id est dicere eam rem traditam non esse et ob id

§ 5. In the case here supposed the title conferred by a completed usucapion is rescinded or cancelled by in integrum restitutio (note on § 33 inf.), and the plaintiff establishes his right by an ordinary vindicatio or Publiciana according to the precise nature of his interest: the assumption by some writers of an independent action (rescissoria or contraria Publicianae) has no foundation. The text speaks only of protection against an absent person; but the principle was applied equally in favour of those whose property, while they were absent rei publicae causa, had been acquired per usucapionem, Dig. 4. 6. 23. 3; 43. I. 15. pr.; cf. the note on in integrum restitutio, § 33 inf. For the old annus utilis Justinian substituted in all cases a quadriennium continuum, Cod. 2. 53. 7. The references at the end of the paragraph are to Dig. 4. 6. 1. 1 ; ib. 21. pr. ; ib. 26. 8; 17. I. 57: 44. 7. 35. pr.

§ 6. The iusta causa of the in integrum restitutio in this case is the dolus of the alienee, and the creditors' action, as seems clear from the text, is in rem: though it is difficult to see why after restitutio there was any necessity for a fiction: cf. Bk. iii. 10. 3 and notes supr. Whether the action (as Theophilus says) was called Pauliana is disputed it is certain that there was a personal action of the same name, and lying under similar circumstances. So far as can be elicited from the authorities, it seems probable that the creditors had, as against fraudulent alienation by the debtor (including wrongful payment of one or some of them in full when he was aware of his insolvency) (1) an actio Pauliana in personam, Dig. 22. 1. 38. 4 (2) an interdictum fraudatorium, Dig. 36. 1. 67. 1 (3) an actio in factum available against a bona fide alienee, Dig. 42. 8. 10. pr. (4) the in integrum restitutio mentioned in the text, with a view to a real action (Pauliana ?). The relation between these remedies, and the precise purpose for which they were respectively employed, are so variously represented by the commentators that it is impossible here to go further into the question. For the missio in possessionem of creditors upon their debtors' insolvency see p. 376 supr.

in bonis debitoris mansisse. Item Serviana et quasi Serviana, 7 quae etiam hypothecaria vocatur, ex ipsius praetoris iurisdictione substantiam capit. Serviana autem experitur quis de rebus coloni, quae pignoris iure pro mercedibus fundi ei tenentur quasi Serviana autem qua creditores pignora hypothecasve persequuntur. inter pignus autem et hypothecam quantum ad actionem hypothecariam nihil interest: nam de qua re inter creditorem et debitorem convenerit, ut sit pro debito obligata, utraque hac appellatione continetur. sed in aliis differentia est: nam pignoris appellatione eam proprie contineri dicimus, quae simul etiam traditur creditori, maxime si mobilis sit: at eam, quae sine traditione nuda conventione tenetur, proprie hypothecae appellatione contineri dicimus.

§ 7. For pignus and hypotheca see pp. 316-320 supr. By the actiones Serviana and hypothecaria the pledgee was enabled, on proving his right of pledge or hypothec, to recover the property over which it existed or damages against any one in whose possession it was, and he could bring the action even before the day fixed for payment had arrived, Dig. 20. 1. 14. pr. The formula had in the earlier period been arbitraria, and ran somewhat as follows: 'si paret eam rem, de qua agitur, ab eo, cuius in bonis tum fuit (pledgor), Aulo Agerio pignoris nomine obligatam esse pro pecunia, quam illum Ao. Ao. ex mutuo dare oporteret, eamque pecuniam solutam non esse, neque eo nomine satisfactum esse, neque per Am. Am. stare, quominus solvatur, nisi arbitratu tuo Numerius Negidius Ao. Ao. restituet aut pecuniam solvat, quanti ea res erit, tanti Nm. N1. Ao. Ao. condemna.'

If the defendant was the pledgor himself, and was condemned in a money payment, its amount could not exceed that of the debt; but if he was a third person, the damages were calculated on the full value of the property, though the plaintiff had to hand over to the pledgor any surplus beyond the amount of the debt, Dig. 20. 1. 21. 3. There was also some difference between this and an ordinary real action in respect of the defendant's liability for fructus, and of some special defences which were here open for him; for by Nov. 4, by which Justinian introduced the beneficium ordinis for sureties, p. 413 supr., a similar beneficium by way of exceptio was established for this case; it being provided that any third person who was in possession of the property pledged could require the pledgee to sue the pledgor and his sureties by personal action before coming upon him with the actio hypothecaria, and that when the debtor as well as his surety had given the creditor hypothecary rights, the creditor could be compelled to resort to those given by the former before he could insist on those given by the latter.

By saying of these actions 'ex ipsius praetoris iurisdictione substantiam capiunt' Justinian means that, unlike those mentioned in the preceding

8 In personam quoque actiones ex sua iurisdictione propositas habet praetor. veluti de pecunia constituta, cui similis videbatur recepticia: sed ex nostra constitutione, cum et, si quid plenius habebat, hoc in pecuniam constitutam transfusum est, ea quasi supervacua iussa est cum sua auctoritate a nostris legibus recedere. item praetor proposuit de peculio servorum filiorumque familias et ex qua quaeritur, an actor iuraverit, et 9 alias complures. De pecunia autem constituta cum omnibus. agitur, quicumque vel pro se vel pro alio soluturos se constituerint, nulla scilicet stipulatione interposita. nam alioquin 10 si stipulanti promiserint, iure civili tenentur. Actiones autem de peculio ideo adversus patrem dominumve comparavit praetor, quia licet ex contractu filiorum servorumve ipso iure non teneantur, aequum tamen esset peculio tenus, quod veluti patrimonium est filiorum filiarumque, item servorum, con11 demnari eos. Item si quis postulante adversario iuraverit deberi sibi pecuniam quam peteret, neque ei solvatur, iustissime accommodat ei talem actionem, per quam non illud

sections, they were not feigned to be civil actions, but were bold innovations (actiones in factum); see Gaius iv. 10, and Excursus X inf. For the pledgee's possessory remedy (interdictum Salvianum) and its relation to the actiones Serviana and hypothecaria see on Tit. 15. 3 inf.

§ 8. For constitutum see p. 415 supr. Recepticia was an action on the formless promise of a banker to creditors or customers, e. g. to return money or other property entrusted to him on and after a specified day; the name being perhaps derived from the sense of recipere which Nonius Marcellus attributes to recipere- promittere, polliceri: cf. Asconius Pedianus: 'recipitur, id est promittitur, id est pro iudicato respondetur.' The advantages of recepticia over the actio de constituta pecunia had been that it applied to all kinds of property, while the latter lay only on promises relating to res fungibiles; that it admitted, while the latter did not, of condicio or dies, and was perpetual, while the latter was limited to a year. The reference is to Cod. 4. 8. 2. pr. and 1. For the actio de peculio see Tit. 7. 4 and notes inf.; for that 'ex qua quaeritur an actor iuraverit' note on the next section.

As

§ 11. The Romans regarded the oath as a mode of proving rights and duties, no less than facts, co-ordinate with judgment and confession; 'post rem iudicatam vel iureiurando decisam vel confessionem in iure factam nihil quaeritur' Dig. 42. 1. 56: cf. note on Tit. 13. 4 inf. appears from the text, when a matter had once been sworn to by one of the parties, the other was estopped from disputing its truth otherwise than by denying that the oath had been taken at all; behind it the law

quaeritur, an ei pecunia debeatur, sed an iuraverit. Poenales 12 quoque actiones bene multas ex sua iurisdictione introduxit: veluti adversus eum qui quid ex albo eius corrupisset: et in eum qui patronum vel parentem in ius vocasset, cum id non impetrasset: item adversus eum, qui vi exemerit eum qui in ius vocaretur, cuiusve dolo alius exemerit: et alias innumerabiles. Praeiudiciales actiones in rem esse videntur, quales 13 sunt, per quas quaeritur, an aliquis liber vel an libertus sit, vel de partu agnoscendo. ex quibus fere una illa legitimam causam habet, per quam quaeritur, an aliquis liber sit: ceterae ex ipsius praetoris iurisdictione substantiam capiunt.

could not go: 'non aliud quaeritur quam an iuratum sit' Dig. 12. 2. 5: 2. The mode in which the oath was used was by the plaintiff demanding of his adversary in the initial stage of the proceedings (in iure, in the formulary period) whether he would swear that the claim had no foundation; if he did so, he was protected by the exceptio iurisiurandi from further litigation: but if, without being prepared to go so far as this, he challenged the plaintiff to swear to the justice of his claim, and the latter did so, he was debarred from denying his liability; if he refused to discharge it, he could be brought to bay by the actio in factum referred to in the text.

§ 12. The praetor's edicts and orders seem, like the leges (Dion. Halic. R. A. 3. 36), to have been engraved on tablets of oak, which were then whitened over and exposed to public view. Subsequently other materials were used: 'in albo, vel in charta, vel in alia materia' Dig. 2. 1. 7. pr., but the name album was retained. Albi corruptio is used in a wide sense is qui album raserit, corruperit, sustulerit, mutaverit, quidve aliud propositum edicendi causa turbaverit, extra ordinem punietur' Paul. sent. rec. 1. 13a. 3. For the action of a patron against his freedman for suing him without first obtaining the praetor's permission (Tit. 16. 3 inf.) see Gaius iv. 46, which also refers to the penal actio in factum 'contra eum qui vi exemerit eum qui in ius vocatur:' for the latter cf. also Dig. 2. 7. Among the 'alias innumerabiles' are the actions mentioned in Tit. 5 supr., and § 25 inf.

§ 13. For praejudicial actions under the system of formulae see Excursus X inf. Their object is merely to judicially ascertain facts which are of legal importance, or the existence of alleged legal relations, e. g. a man's status or paternity, the amount of a dos (Gaius iv. 44), whether a woman is married or not, Dig. 25. 3. 3. 4, whether the provisions of this or that enactment have been complied with (e.g. the lex Cicereia, Gaius iii. 123. p. 411 supr.), etc. Hence the name praeiudicia; the decision forms or may form the basis of subsequent litigation. As they do not result in condemnation, but merely in a pronunciatio, they are sometimes said to be iudicia, but not actiones (e.g. Dig. 3. 3. 35. 2); Justinian says

14 Sic itaque discretis actionibus certum est non posse actorem rem suam ita ab aliquo petere 'si paret eum dare oportere': nec enim quod actoris est id ei dari oportet, quia scilicet dari cuiquam id intellegitur, quod ita datur, ut eius fiat, nec res quae iam actoris est magis eius fieri potest. plane odio furum, quo magis pluribus actionibus teneantur, effectum est, ut extra poenam dupli aut quadrupli rei recipiendae nomine fures etiam hac actione teneantur 'si paret eos dare oportere,' quamvis sit adversus eos etiam haec in rem actio, per quam 15 rem suam quis esse petit. Appellamus autem in rem quidem actiones vindicationes: in personam vero actiones, quibus dare facere oportere intenditur, condictiones. condicere enim est denuntiare prisca lingua: nunc vero abusive dicimus condictionem actionem in personam esse, qua actor intendit dari sibi oportere nulla enim hoc tempore eo nomine denuntiatio fit.

16

Sequens illa divisio est, quod quaedam actiones rei persequendae gratia comparatae sunt, quaedam poenae perse17 quendae, quaedam mixtae sunt. Rei persequendae causa comparatae sunt omnes in rem actiones. earum vero actionum,

of them 'in rem esse videntur' because the plaintiff 'cum eo agit qui nullo iure ei obligatus est, movet tamen alicui de aliqua re controversiam' §1 supr. cf. Gaius iv. 87; though in some passages (e.g. Dig. 44. 7. 37. pr. ; 6. 1. 1. 2) they are opposed to vindicationes. The praeiudicium 'an aliquis liber sit' was older even than the Twelve Tables: 'ius quod ipse [Appius Claudius] ex vetere iure in duodecim tabulas transtulerat' Dig.

I. 2. 2. 24.

§ 14. Of course the expression 'si paret, etc.' has no formal or processual signification in Justinian; all that is meant is that a plaintiff cannot by a real action demand conveyance (datio) but merely recognition of his ownership or other ius in rem. For the anomaly of allowing a person whose property has been stolen the option between a real and a personal action see p. 507 supr. In this connection furtum includes not only rapina, but violent ouster from land: 'et ei, qui vi aliquem de fundo deiecerit posse condici' Dig. 13. 3. 2. 15.

§ 15. For the origin and history of condictio see Excursus X inf. The grounds upon which it lay were the same in Justinian's time as in the formulary period; viz. mutuum, formal contract, legatum, lex (§ 24 inf.), and enrichment of a defendant at the plaintiff's cost sine causa; but the penal sponsio tertiae partis in condictio certi had disappeared, as might be inferred from the description in § 17 inf. of the remedy on mutuum as merely rei persecutoria.

§ 17. Actions rei persequendae causa are defined as those 'quibus