De fundo dotali
(Concerning Land Given by Way of Dowry.)
1Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXXVI. The Lex Julia, having reference to land given by way of dowry, sometimes does not apply; for instance, where the husband fails to make provision against threatened injury, and the neighbor is placed in possession of the premises given as dowry, and is afterwards directed to return the same. In this case the neighbor becomes the owner, because the alienation is not a voluntary one. 1Ad Dig. 23,5,1,1Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. III, § 528, Note 7.But it is possible for the entire title to the land to pass to another, as, for instance, to the heir of the husband, but still, with the same condition that it cannot be alienated.
2Ulpianus, On Adultery, Book V. If a husband should be reduced to slavery, cannot his owner alienate his land? I think the better opinion is that he cannot. Wherefore, if the property of the husband should be confiscated, the sale of the land would, nevertheless, be prevented; even though the Treasury is always held to be a good and solvent successor.
3Paulus, On the Edict, Book XXXVI. Where a tract of land is devised to slaves who form part of the dowry, according to the Lex Julia it also becomes dotal. 1Land given as dowry cannot be alienated whenever the wife is entitled to a dotal action, or where one should by all means be brought.
4Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XI. The Lex Julia, which has reference to land given by way of dowry, and provides that a husband cannot encumber or alienate it, ought to be more broadly interpreted, so as to apply as well to a betrothed person as to a husband.
5Ulpianus, On All Tribunals, Book II. Julianus states in the Sixteenth Book of the Digest that a husband cannot lose any servitude attaching to the land, or impose any new ones upon it.
6The Same, On Adultery, Book V. Freedom from a servitude due to an urban estate subject to dowry cannot be granted by the husband, for fear that by this the condition of the property may be deteriorated.
7Julianus, Digest, Book XVI. Where a husband acquires a tract of land that belongs to Titius, and which is subject to a servitude for the benefit of real estate subject to dowry, the servitude becomes confused. But if he returns the said land to Titius, without renewing the servitude, the husband will be to blame, and, in this instance, he must pay such damages as may be assessed by the court. Where, however, the husband is not solvent, prætorian actions will be granted against Titius in favor of the woman for the re-establishment of the servitude. 1When, however, a woman gives as her dowry land to which a tract belonging to her husband owes a servitude, it comes into the hands of the husband without the servitude; and therefore it cannot be held that the rights attaching to said land have become deteriorated through the act of the husband. What then should be done? It is the duty of the judge, who is to decide with reference to the dowry, to order the land to be returned to the woman, or to her heir, and the servitude to be re-established.
8Alfenus, Epitomes of the Digest by Paulus, Book III. A certain man requested his wife to cut down an olive plantation which was on the dotal land, in order to replace it with a new one. The man afterwards died after bequeathing the dowry to his wife, and it was decided that the wood which had been cut from the olive trees should be returned to her.
9Africanus, Questions, Book VIII. If a woman promises, by way of dowry, to her husband who is her debtor, land for which he owes her, the said land becomes dotal. 1Where she promises him, as dowry, either the land or ten aurei which he owes her, he will have the right to decide of which of these the dowry shall consist. 2But if the husband owed Stichus, a tract of land, and his indebtedness was promised to him as dowry, and Stichus should die, the dowry will then consist of the land. 3Julianus says that the result of all this would be that if either the Cornelian or the Sempronian estate for which he was indebted was promised to him as dowry, whichever of these he selected would constitute the dowry; and it is evident that if he wished to alienate either of them he could not alienate the other. If, however, he afterwards should purchase the one that he alienated, he would still have the power to alienate the one which he had retained, if he desired to do so.
10Paulus, Questions, Book V. The application of this law is therefore indefinite, because the obligation was dotal. Hence where the husband was able to alienate one tract of land could he also alienate the other, because he had the right to repurchase the first, even if this had not yet been done? Or should this not be allowed, for fear either one of them might compose the dowry? It is certain that one of them would be held to have been lawfully alienated, if the other was afterwards redeemed.
12Papinianus, On Adultery, Book I. Even though the marriage should be dissolved, the land is still understood to be dotal. 1The consent of a father-in-law to the sale of land belonging to a dowry is of no force or effect.
13Ulpianus, On Adultery, Book V. We should understand dotal land to include both that situated in town and country, for the Lex Julia had reference to every kind of buildings. 1The term “land” also applies to a portion of the tract, hence, whether the entire tract has been given as dowry, or only a part of the same, it cannot be alienated. This is the law at present. 2We understand the term “dotal land” to refer to that of which the ownership is acquired by the husband, so that then only is he forbidden to alienate it. 3The same relief is granted by the law to the heir of the wife, as is granted to the wife herself. 4Where a wife is appointed heir to her husband, and the land belonging to the dowry is bequeathed, if, after the deduction of the legacy, the woman should have an amount of interest in the estate equal in value to the dowry, the legacy will be valid. The question arises whether it will be valid if the amount should be less. Scævola says that a portion can be recovered, if not all of it, if a certain amount is lacking to make up the dowry; and that only that much will remain in the hands of the woman which is required to supply the deficiency.
14Paulus, On Adultery, Book III. Where a woman, who was about to marry Titius, transferred to Mævius, with the consent of her husband, the land which she had given as dowry; the dowry will be in the same condition as if she had transferred it to Titius herself. 1If anyone should give a tract of land as dowry for a woman, it becomes dotal; for it is considered to have come into the hands of the husband on account of his wife. 2Where a husband owes his wife land belonging to another, and she promises it to him by way of dowry, it will be in suspense, and will become dotal when it comes into his hands. 3If a woman rejects land which has been devised to her by way of dowry, or even if she fails to accept an estate or a legacy, where her husband was substituted, the land will become dotal.
15Papinianus, Opinions, Book I. It has been decided that dotal land, the possession of which was retained by the husband after letters which he sent to his wife, in which he stated that the land would not become dotal, can be retained by the husband after the wife had died during marriage, for the reason that she would not be entitled to an action on contract.
16Ad Dig. 23,5,16Windscheid: Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts, 7. Aufl. 1891, Bd. I, § 171, Note 2.Tryphoninus, Disputations, Book XI. Where a woman gave her husband, by way of dowry, a tract of land of which Titius had possession in good faith, and had a right to claim for himself on the ground of prescription, and her husband neglected to bring suit for said land when he could have done so, he will be responsible. For although the Lex Julia, which forbids dotal land to be alienated, also has reference to an acquisition of this description, it does not, however, interrupt possession which has existed for a long time, if this had already begun before the land was rendered dotal. It is evident that if a very few days are lacking to establish the prescriptive right, the husband will not be at all to blame.
18Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book VI. A husband opened marble quarries on dotal land. A divorce having taken place, the question arose to whom the marble which had been taken out but which had not yet been removed, belonged; and whether the wife or the husband should bear the expense incurred in working the quarries. Labeo said the marble belonged to the husband, but he denied that anything should be paid to him by the wife, because the expense was not necessary, and the land had been rendered less valuable. I think that not only necessary expenses but also those that are useful should be paid by the wife, and I do not believe that the land was decreased in value, if the quarries were of such a kind that the quantity of stone in them would, in time, be increased. 1If the wife should be in default, where an agreement was made that she should receive the land after paying the appraised value of part of the same to her husband; Labeo says that any profits collected in the meantime belong to the latter. I think that the better opinion is that the husband should be entitled to a proportionate share of the profits, and that the remainder should be refunded to the woman; which is the law at present.