1Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XXXI. A right to usucaption, and one which is extremely just, is that which is said to exist on account of a dowry, so that anyone who receives property by way of dowry can acquire it by usucaption, after the expiration of the time usually prescribed by law in the case of those who acquire property in this manner as purchasers. 1It makes no difference whether certain specified articles, or the entire amount of the property, is given by way of dowry. 2In the first place, let us consider the time when anyone can acquire property by usucaption as dowry; and whether this is to begin after the date of the marriage, or before it. A question commonly discussed is, whether a man who is betrothed (that is to say, one who has not yet been married), can acquire property by usucaption, because of its being a dowry. Julianus says that, if the woman who is betrothed delivers the property to the other party, with the intention that it shall not belong to him until after the marriage has been solemnized, usucaption will not take place. If, however, this was evidently not the intention, it should be held (so Julianus says) that the property immediately becomes his; and if it belongs to someone else, it can be acquired by usucaption. This opinion seems to me to be plausible. But, before the marriage takes place, usucaption becomes operative, not because of the dowry, but on the ground of ownership. 3During the existence of the marriage, usucaption takes place between the persons who are married, on account of the dowry. If, however, the marriage does not exist, Cassius says that usucaption cannot occur as there is no dowry. 4He also says that if the husband thinks that he is married, when this is not the case, he cannot acquire the property by usucaption, because there is no dowry. This opinion is reasonable.

2Paulus, On the Edict, Book LIV. If property which has been appraised is delivered before the marriage has been solemnized, it cannot be acquired by usucaption, either on the ground of purchase or on that of ownership.

3Scævola, Digest, Book XXV. Two daughters became the heirs of their father who died intestate, and each one of them gave slaves belonging to them in common by way of dowry, and then, some years after the death of their father, they brought suit in partition. As the husbands had for many years held possession of the slaves given by way of dowry as dotal slaves, the question arose whether they could be held to have acquired them by usucaption, if they believed that they belonged to those who had given them as dowry. The answer was that there was nothing in the case stated to prevent them from being acquired by usucaption.