Ex posterioribus Labeonis libri
Ex libro III
Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book III. If I have the usufruct of a garden, and a river covers it and then recedes; it is the opinion of Labeo that the usufruct is also restored, because the soil always remained in the same legal condition. I think that this is true only where the river covered the garden by reason of an inundation; for if its bed was changed and it flowed in that direction, I think that the usufruct is lost, as the ground of the former bed becomes public property, and cannot be restored to its former state. 1Labeo states that the same rule of law should be observed with reference to a right of way and a road; but I am of the same opinion with reference to these things as I am with reference to the usufruct. 2Labeo says that even if the surface of the ground is removed from my field and replaced with other soil, the land does not, for this reason, cease to be mine, any more than if the field were covered with manure.
Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book II. The power of giving property in pledge is a product of the same.
Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book III. A certain man who was accustomed to set down in his expense account all his clothing, as well as articles of different kinds, as “furniture,” bequeathed his household goods to his wife. Labeo, Ofilius, and Cascellius very properly deny that the clothing was embraced in the legacy, because it cannot be said that clothing is classed as furniture.
Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book III. A certain individual that owned the slave Flaccus, who was a fuller, and Philonicus, who was a baker, left to his wife the baker Flaccus; and the question arose which of the slaves was due, and whether both of them were not included in the legacy. It was held, in the first place, that that slave was bequeathed whom the testator intended should form part of the legacy. If this could not be ascertained, an investigation should then be made to learn whether the master knew the names of his slaves. If this was the case, the slave would then be due whom he mentioned by name, even if he had made a mistake with reference to his trade. Where, however, the names of the slaves were unknown to him, the baker should be considered to be the subject of the legacy, just as if his name had not been mentioned.
Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book III. The profits of any kind of property can be given in pledge.