<p>=== <SPAN name="link442HCH0003" id="link442HCH0003"></SPAN></p>
<h2> Chapter XLIV: Idea Of The Roman Jurisprudence.—Part III. </h2>
<p>Among savage nations, the want of letters is imperfectly supplied by the
use of visible signs, which awaken attention, and perpetuate the
remembrance of any public or private transaction. The jurisprudence of the
first Romans exhibited the scenes of a pantomime; the words were adapted
to the gestures, and the slightest error or neglect in the forms of
proceeding was sufficient to annul the substance of the fairest claim. The
communion of the marriage-life was denoted by the necessary elements of
fire and water; <SPAN href="#link44note-49" name="link44noteref-49" id="link44noteref-49">49</SPAN> and the divorced wife resigned the bunch of
keys, by the delivery of which she had been invested with the government
of the family. The manumission of a son, or a slave, was performed by
turning him round with a gentle blow on the cheek; a work was prohibited
by the casting of a stone; prescription was interrupted by the breaking of
a branch; the clinched fist was the symbol of a pledge or deposit; the
right hand was the gift of faith and confidence. The indenture of
covenants was a broken straw; weights and scales were introduced into
every payment, and the heir who accepted a testament was sometimes obliged
to snap his fingers, to cast away his garments, and to leap or dance with
real or affected transport. <SPAN href="#link44note-50"
name="link44noteref-50" id="link44noteref-50">50</SPAN> If a citizen pursued
any stolen goods into a neighbor's house, he concealed his nakedness with
a linen towel, and hid his face with a mask or basin, lest he should
encounter the eyes of a virgin or a matron. <SPAN href="#link44note-51"
name="link44noteref-51" id="link44noteref-51">51</SPAN> In a civil action the
plaintiff touched the ear of his witness, seized his reluctant adversary
by the neck, and implored, in solemn lamentation, the aid of his
fellow-citizens. The two competitors grasped each other's hand as if they
stood prepared for combat before the tribunal of the praetor; he commanded
them to produce the object of the dispute; they went, they returned with
measured steps, and a clod of earth was cast at his feet to represent the
field for which they contended. This occult science of the words and
actions of law was the inheritance of the pontiffs and patricians. Like
the Chaldean astrologers, they announced to their clients the days of
business and repose; these important trifles were interwoven with the
religion of Numa; and after the publication of the Twelve Tables, the
Roman people was still enslaved by the ignorance of judicial proceedings.
The treachery of some plebeian officers at length revealed the profitable
mystery: in a more enlightened age, the legal actions were derided and
observed; and the same antiquity which sanctified the practice,
obliterated the use and meaning of this primitive language. <SPAN href="#link44note-52" name="link44noteref-52" id="link44noteref-52">52</SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-49" id="link44note-49">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
49 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-49">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Scaevola, most probably
Q. Cervidius Scaevola; the master of Papinian considers this acceptance of
fire and water as the essence of marriage, (Pandect. l. xxiv. tit. 1, leg.
66. See Heineccius, Hist. J. R. No. 317.)]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-50" id="link44note-50">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
50 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-50">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Cicero (de Officiis,
iii. 19) may state an ideal case, but St. Am brose (de Officiis, iii. 2,)
appeals to the practice of his own times, which he understood as a lawyer
and a magistrate, (Schulting ad Ulpian, Fragment. tit. xxii. No. 28, p.
643, 644.) * Note: In this passage the author has endeavored to collect
all the examples of judicial formularies which he could find. That which
he adduces as the form of cretio haereditatis is absolutely false. It is
sufficient to glance at the passage in Cicero which he cites, to see that
it has no relation to it. The author appeals to the opinion of Schulting,
who, in the passage quoted, himself protests against the ridiculous and
absurd interpretation of the passage in Cicero, and observes that Graevius
had already well explained the real sense. See in Gaius the form of cretio
haereditatis Inst. l. ii. p. 166.—W.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-51" id="link44note-51">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
51 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-51">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ The furtum lance
licioque conceptum was no longer understood in the time of the Antonines,
(Aulus Gellius, xvi. 10.) The Attic derivation of Heineccius, (Antiquitat.
Rom. l. iv. tit. i. No. 13—21) is supported by the evidence of
Aristophanes, his scholiast, and Pollux. * Note: Nothing more is known of
this ceremony; nevertheless we find that already in his own days Gaius
turned it into ridicule. He says, (lib. iii. et p. 192, Sections 293,)
prohibiti actio quadrupli ex edicto praetoris introducta est; lex autem eo
nomine nullam poenam constituit. Hoc solum praecepit, ut qui quaerere
velit, nudus quaerat, linteo cinctus, lancem habens; qui si quid
invenerit. jubet id lex furtum manifestum esse. Quid sit autem linteum?
quaesitum est. Sed verius est consuti genus esse, quo necessariae partes
tegerentur. Quare lex tota ridicula est. Nam qui vestitum quaerere
prohibet, is et nudum quaerere prohibiturus est; eo magis, quod invenerit
ibi imponat, neutrum eorum procedit, si id quod quaeratur, ejus
magnitudinis aut naturae sit ut neque subjici, neque ibi imponi possit.
Certe non dubitatur, cujuscunque materiae sit ea lanx, satis legi fieri.
We see moreover, from this passage, that the basin, as most authors,
resting on the authority of Festus, have supposed, was not used to cover
the figure.—W. Gibbon says the face, though equally inaccurately.
This passage of Gaius, I must observe, as well as others in M. Warnkonig's
work, is very inaccurately printed.—M.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-52" id="link44note-52">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
52 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-52">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ In his Oration for
Murena, (c. 9—13,) Cicero turns into ridicule the forms and
mysteries of the civilians, which are represented with more candor by
Aulus Gellius, (Noct. Attic. xx. 10,) Gravina, (Opp p. 265, 266, 267,) and
Heineccius, (Antiquitat. l. iv. tit. vi.) * Note: Gibbon had conceived
opinions too decided against the forms of procedure in use among the
Romans. Yet it is on these solemn forms that the certainty of laws has
been founded among all nations. Those of the Romans were very intimately
allied with the ancient religion, and must of necessity have disappeared
as Rome attained a higher degree of civilization. Have not modern nations,
even the most civilized, overloaded their laws with a thousand forms,
often absurd, almost always trivial? How many examples are afforded by the
English law! See, on the nature of these forms, the work of M. de Savigny
on the Vocation of our Age for Legislation and Jurisprudence, Heidelberg,
1814, p. 9, 10.—W. This work of M. Savigny has been translated into
English by Mr. Hayward.—M.]</p>
<p>A more liberal art was cultivated, however, by the sage of Rome, who, in a
stricter sense, may be considered as the authors of the civil law. The
alteration of the idiom and manners of the Romans rendered the style of
the Twelve Tables less familiar to each rising generation, and the
doubtful passages were imperfectly explained by the study of legal
antiquarians. To define the ambiguities, to circumscribe the latitude, to
apply the principles, to extend the consequences, to reconcile the real or
apparent contradictions, was a much nobler and more important task; and
the province of legislation was silently invaded by the expounders of
ancient statutes. Their subtle interpretations concurred with the equity
of the praetor, to reform the tyranny of the darker ages: however strange
or intricate the means, it was the aim of artificial jurisprudence to
restore the simple dictates of nature and reason, and the skill of private
citizens was usefully employed to undermine the public institutions of
their country. <SPAN href="#link44note-521" name="link44noteref-521" id="link44noteref-521">521</SPAN> The revolution of almost one thousand
years, from the Twelve Tables to the reign of Justinian, may be divided
into three periods, almost equal in duration, and distinguished from each
other by the mode of instruction and the character of the civilians. <SPAN href="#link44note-53" name="link44noteref-53" id="link44noteref-53">53</SPAN>
Pride and ignorance contributed, during the first period, to confine
within narrow limits the science of the Roman law. On the public days of
market or assembly, the masters of the art were seen walking in the forum
ready to impart the needful advice to the meanest of their
fellow-citizens, from whose votes, on a future occasion, they might
solicit a grateful return. As their years and honors increased, they
seated themselves at home on a chair or throne, to expect with patient
gravity the visits of their clients, who at the dawn of day, from the town
and country, began to thunder at their door. The duties of social life,
and the incidents of judicial proceeding, were the ordinary subject of
these consultations, and the verbal or written opinion of the
juris-consults was framed according to the rules of prudence and law. The
youths of their own order and family were permitted to listen; their
children enjoyed the benefit of more private lessons, and the Mucian race
was long renowned for the hereditary knowledge of the civil law. The
second period, the learned and splendid age of jurisprudence, may be
extended from the birth of Cicero to the reign of Severus Alexander. A
system was formed, schools were instituted, books were composed, and both
the living and the dead became subservient to the instruction of the
student. The tripartite of Aelius Paetus, surnamed Catus, or the Cunning,
was preserved as the oldest work of Jurisprudence. Cato the censor derived
some additional fame from his legal studies, and those of his son: the
kindred appellation of Mucius Scaevola was illustrated by three sages of
the law; but the perfection of the science was ascribed to Servius
Sulpicius, their disciple, and the friend of Tully; and the long
succession, which shone with equal lustre under the republic and under the
Caesars, is finally closed by the respectable characters of Papinian, of
Paul, and of Ulpian. Their names, and the various titles of their
productions, have been minutely preserved, and the example of Labeo may
suggest some idea of their diligence and fecundity. That eminent lawyer of
the Augustan age divided the year between the city and country, between
business and composition; and four hundred books are enumerated as the
fruit of his retirement. Of the collection of his rival Capito, the two
hundred and fifty-ninth book is expressly quoted; and few teachers could
deliver their opinions in less than a century of volumes. In the third
period, between the reigns of Alexander and Justinian, the oracles of
jurisprudence were almost mute. The measure of curiosity had been filled:
the throne was occupied by tyrants and Barbarians, the active spirits were
diverted by religious disputes, and the professors of Rome,
Constantinople, and Berytus, were humbly content to repeat the lessons of
their more enlightened predecessors. From the slow advances and rapid
decay of these legal studies, it may be inferred, that they require a
state of peace and refinement. From the multitude of voluminous civilians
who fill the intermediate space, it is evident that such studies may be
pursued, and such works may be performed, with a common share of judgment,
experience, and industry. The genius of Cicero and Virgil was more
sensibly felt, as each revolving age had been found incapable of producing
a similar or a second: but the most eminent teachers of the law were
assured of leaving disciples equal or superior to themselves in merit and
reputation.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-521" id="link44note-521">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
521 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-521">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Compare, on the
Responsa Prudentum, Warnkonig, Histoire Externe du Droit Romain Bruxelles,
1836, p. 122.—M.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-53" id="link44note-53">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
53 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-53">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ The series of the civil
lawyers is deduced by Pomponius, (de Origine Juris Pandect. l. i. tit.
ii.) The moderns have discussed, with learning and criticism, this branch
of literary history; and among these I have chiefly been guided by Gravina
(p. 41—79) and Hei neccius, (Hist. J. R. No. 113-351.) Cicero, more
especially in his books de Oratore, de Claris Oratoribus, de Legibus, and
the Clavie Ciceroniana of Ernesti (under the names of Mucius, &c.)
afford much genuine and pleasing information. Horace often alludes to the
morning labors of the civilians, (Serm. I. i. 10, Epist. II. i. 103, &c)</p>
<p>Agricolam laudat juris legumque peritus Sub galli cantum,<br/>
consultor ubi ostia pulsat.<br/>
——————<br/>
Romae dulce diu fuit et solemne, reclusa Mane domo vigilare,<br/>
clienti promere jura.<br/></p>
<p class="foot">
* Note: It is particularly in this division of the history of the Roman
jurisprudence into epochs, that Gibbon displays his profound knowledge of
the laws of this people. M. Hugo, adopting this division, prefaced these
three periods with the history of the times anterior to the Law of the
Twelve Tables, which are, as it were, the infancy of the Roman law.—W]</p>
<p>The jurisprudence which had been grossly adapted to the wants of the first
Romans, was polished and improved in the seventh century of the city, by
the alliance of Grecian philosophy. The Scaevolas had been taught by use
and experience; but Servius Sulpicius <SPAN href="#link44note-5311"
name="link44noteref-5311" id="link44noteref-5311">5311</SPAN> was the first
civilian who established his art on a certain and general theory. <SPAN href="#link44note-54" name="link44noteref-54" id="link44noteref-54">54</SPAN>
For the discernment of truth and falsehood he applied, as an infallible
rule, the logic of Aristotle and the stoics, reduced particular cases to
general principles, and diffused over the shapeless mass the light of
order and eloquence. Cicero, his contemporary and friend, declined the
reputation of a professed lawyer; but the jurisprudence of his country was
adorned by his incomparable genius, which converts into gold every object
that it touches. After the example of Plato, he composed a republic; and,
for the use of his republic, a treatise of laws; in which he labors to
deduce from a celestial origin the wisdom and justice of the Roman
constitution. The whole universe, according to his sublime hypothesis,
forms one immense commonwealth: gods and men, who participate of the same
essence, are members of the same community; reason prescribes the law of
nature and nations; and all positive institutions, however modified by
accident or custom, are drawn from the rule of right, which the Deity has
inscribed on every virtuous mind. From these philosophical mysteries, he
mildly excludes the sceptics who refuse to believe, and the epicureans who
are unwilling to act. The latter disdain the care of the republic: he
advises them to slumber in their shady gardens. But he humbly entreats
that the new academy would be silent, since her bold objections would too
soon destroy the fair and well ordered structure of his lofty system. <SPAN href="#link44note-55" name="link44noteref-55" id="link44noteref-55">55</SPAN>
Plato, Aristotle, and Zeno, he represents as the only teachers who arm and
instruct a citizen for the duties of social life. Of these, the armor of
the stoics <SPAN href="#link44note-56" name="link44noteref-56" id="link44noteref-56">56</SPAN> was found to be of the firmest temper; and it
was chiefly worn, both for use and ornament, in the schools of
jurisprudence. From the portico, the Roman civilians learned to live, to
reason, and to die: but they imbibed in some degree the prejudices of the
sect; the love of paradox, the pertinacious habits of dispute, and a
minute attachment to words and verbal distinctions. The superiority of
form to matter was introduced to ascertain the right of property: and the
equality of crimes is countenanced by an opinion of Trebatius, <SPAN href="#link44note-57" name="link44noteref-57" id="link44noteref-57">57</SPAN>
that he who touches the ear, touches the whole body; and that he who
steals from a heap of corn, or a hogshead of wine, is guilty of the entire
theft. <SPAN href="#link44note-58" name="link44noteref-58" id="link44noteref-58">58</SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-5311" id="link44note-5311">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
5311 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-5311">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ M. Hugo thinks that
the ingenious system of the Institutes adopted by a great number of the
ancient lawyers, and by Justinian himself, dates from Severus Sulpicius.
Hist du Droit Romain, vol.iii.p. 119.—W.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-54" id="link44note-54">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
54 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-54">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Crassus, or rather
Cicero himself, proposes (de Oratore, i. 41, 42) an idea of the art or
science of jurisprudence, which the eloquent, but illiterate, Antonius (i.
58) affects to deride. It was partly executed by Servius Sulpicius, (in
Bruto, c. 41,) whose praises are elegantly varied in the classic Latinity
of the Roman Gravina, (p. 60.)]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-55" id="link44note-55">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
55 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-55">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Perturbatricem autem
omnium harum rerum academiam, hanc ab Arcesila et Carneade recentem,
exoremus ut sileat, nam si invaserit in haec, quae satis scite instructa
et composita videantur, nimis edet ruinas, quam quidem ego placare cupio,
submovere non audeo. (de Legibus, i. 13.) From this passage alone, Bentley
(Remarks on Free-thinking, p. 250) might have learned how firmly Cicero
believed in the specious doctrines which he has adorned.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-56" id="link44note-56">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
56 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-56">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ The stoic philosophy
was first taught at Rome by Panaetius, the friend of the younger Scipio,
(see his life in the Mem. de l'Academis des Inscriptions, tom. x. p. 75—89.)]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-57" id="link44note-57">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
57 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-57">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ As he is quoted by
Ulpian, (leg.40, 40, ad Sabinum in Pandect. l. xlvii. tit. ii. leg. 21.)
Yet Trebatius, after he was a leading civilian, que qui familiam duxit,
became an epicurean, (Cicero ad Fam. vii. 5.) Perhaps he was not constant
or sincere in his new sect. * Note: Gibbon had entirely misunderstood this
phrase of Cicero. It was only since his time that the real meaning of the
author was apprehended. Cicero, in enumerating the qualifications of
Trebatius, says, Accedit etiam, quod familiam ducit in jure civili,
singularis memoria, summa scientia, which means that Trebatius possessed a
still further most important qualification for a student of civil law, a
remarkable memory, &c. This explanation, already conjectured by G.
Menage, Amaenit. Juris Civilis, c. 14, is found in the dictionary of
Scheller, v. Familia, and in the History of the Roman Law by M. Hugo. Many
authors have asserted, without any proof sufficient to warrant the
conjecture, that Trebatius was of the school of Epicurus—W.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-58" id="link44note-58">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
58 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-58">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ See Gravina (p. 45—51)
and the ineffectual cavils of Mascou. Heineccius (Hist. J. R. No. 125)
quotes and approves a dissertation of Everard Otto, de Stoica
Jurisconsultorum Philosophia.]</p>
<p>Arms, eloquence, and the study of the civil law, promoted a citizen to the
honors of the Roman state; and the three professions were sometimes more
conspicuous by their union in the same character. In the composition of
the edict, a learned praetor gave a sanction and preference to his private
sentiments; the opinion of a censor, or a counsel, was entertained with
respect; and a doubtful interpretation of the laws might be supported by
the virtues or triumphs of the civilian. The patrician arts were long
protected by the veil of mystery; and in more enlightened times, the
freedom of inquiry established the general principles of jurisprudence.
Subtile and intricate cases were elucidated by the disputes of the forum:
rules, axioms, and definitions, <SPAN href="#link44note-59"
name="link44noteref-59" id="link44noteref-59">59</SPAN> were admitted as the
genuine dictates of reason; and the consent of the legal professors was
interwoven into the practice of the tribunals. But these interpreters
could neither enact nor execute the laws of the republic; and the judges
might disregard the authority of the Scaevolas themselves, which was often
overthrown by the eloquence or sophistry of an ingenious pleader. <SPAN href="#link44note-60" name="link44noteref-60" id="link44noteref-60">60</SPAN>
Augustus and Tiberius were the first to adopt, as a useful engine, the
science of the civilians; and their servile labors accommodated the old
system to the spirit and views of despotism. Under the fair pretence of
securing the dignity of the art, the privilege of subscribing legal and
valid opinions was confined to the sages of senatorian or equestrian rank,
who had been previously approved by the judgment of the prince; and this
monopoly prevailed, till Adrian restored the freedom of the profession to
every citizen conscious of his abilities and knowledge. The discretion of
the praetor was now governed by the lessons of his teachers; the judges
were enjoined to obey the comment as well as the text of the law; and the
use of codicils was a memorable innovation, which Augustus ratified by the
advice of the civilians. <SPAN href="#link44note-61" name="link44noteref-61" id="link44noteref-61">61</SPAN> <SPAN href="#link44note-6111"
name="link44noteref-6111" id="link44noteref-6111">6111</SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-59" id="link44note-59">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
59 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-59">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ We have heard of the
Catonian rule, the Aquilian stipulation, and the Manilian forms, of 211
maxims, and of 247 definitions, (Pandect. l. i. tit. xvi. xvii.)]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-60" id="link44note-60">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
60 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-60">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Read Cicero, l. i. de
Oratore, Topica, pro Murena.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-61" id="link44note-61">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
61 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-61">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ See Pomponius, (de
Origine Juris Pandect. l. i. tit. ii. leg. 2, No 47,) Heineccius, (ad
Institut. l. i. tit. ii. No. 8, l. ii. tit. xxv. in Element et
Antiquitat.,) and Gravina, (p. 41—45.) Yet the monopoly of Augustus,
a harsh measure, would appear with some softening in contemporary
evidence; and it was probably veiled by a decree of the senate]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-6111" id="link44note-6111">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
6111 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-6111">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ The author here
follows the then generally received opinion of Heineccius. The proofs
which appear to confirm it are l. 2 47, D. I. 2, and 8. Instit. I. 2. The
first of these passages speaks expressly of a privilege granted to certain
lawyers, until the time of Adrian, publice respondendi jus ante Augusti
tempora non dabatur. Primus Divus ut major juris auctoritas haberetur,
constituit, ut ex auctoritate ejus responderent. The passage of the
Institutes speaks of the different opinions of those, quibus est permissum
jura condere. It is true that the first of these passages does not say
that the opinion of these privileged lawyers had the force of a law for
the judges. For this reason M. Hugo altogether rejects the opinion adopted
by Heineccius, by Bach, and in general by all the writers who preceded
him. He conceives that the 8 of the Institutes referred to the
constitution of Valentinian III., which regulated the respective authority
to be ascribed to the different writings of the great civilians. But we
have now the following passage in the Institutes of Gaius: Responsa
prudentum sunt sententiae et opiniones eorum, quibus permissum est jura
condere; quorum omnium si in unum sententiae concorrupt, id quod ita
sentiunt, legis vicem obtinet, si vero dissentiunt, judici licet, quam
velit sententiam sequi, idque rescripto Divi Hadrian signiticatur. I do
not know, how in opposition to this passage, the opinion of M. Hugo can be
maintained. We must add to this the passage quoted from Pomponius and from
such strong proofs, it seems incontestable that the emperors had granted
some kind of privilege to certain civilians, quibus permissum erat jura
condere. Their opinion had sometimes the force of law, legis vicem. M.
Hugo, endeavoring to reconcile this phrase with his system, gives it a
forced interpretation, which quite alters the sense; he supposes that the
passage contains no more than what is evident of itself, that the
authority of the civilians was to be respected, thus making a privilege of
that which was free to all the world. It appears to me almost
indisputable, that the emperors had sanctioned certain provisions relative
to the authority of these civilians, consulted by the judges. But how far
was their advice to be respected? This is a question which it is
impossible to answer precisely, from the want of historic evidence. Is it
not possible that the emperors established an authority to be consulted by
the judges? and in this case this authority must have emanated from
certain civilians named for this purpose by the emperors. See Hugo, l. c.
Moreover, may not the passage of Suetonius, in the Life of Caligula, where
he says that the emperor would no longer permit the civilians to give
their advice, mean that Caligula entertained the design of suppressing
this institution? See on this passage the Themis, vol. xi. p. 17, 36. Our
author not being acquainted with the opinions opposed to Heineccius has
not gone to the bottom of the subject.—W.]</p>
<p>The most absolute mandate could only require that the judges should agree
with the civilians, if the civilians agreed among themselves. But positive
institutions are often the result of custom and prejudice; laws and
language are ambiguous and arbitrary; where reason is incapable of
pronouncing, the love of argument is inflamed by the envy of rivals, the
vanity of masters, the blind attachment of their disciples; and the Roman
jurisprudence was divided by the once famous sects of the Proculians and
Sabinians. <SPAN href="#link44note-62" name="link44noteref-62" id="link44noteref-62">62</SPAN> Two sages of the law, Ateius Capito and
Antistius Labeo, <SPAN href="#link44note-63" name="link44noteref-63" id="link44noteref-63">63</SPAN> adorned the peace of the Augustan age; the
former distinguished by the favor of his sovereign; the latter more
illustrious by his contempt of that favor, and his stern though harmless
opposition to the tyrant of Rome. Their legal studies were influenced by
the various colors of their temper and principles. Labeo was attached to
the form of the old republic; his rival embraced the more profitable
substance of the rising monarchy. But the disposition of a courtier is
tame and submissive; and Capito seldom presumed to deviate from the
sentiments, or at least from the words, of his predecessors; while the
bold republican pursued his independent ideas without fear of paradox or
innovations. The freedom of Labeo was enslaved, however, by the rigor of
his own conclusions, and he decided, according to the letter of the law,
the same questions which his indulgent competitor resolved with a latitude
of equity more suitable to the common sense and feelings of mankind. If a
fair exchange had been substituted to the payment of money, Capito still
considered the transaction as a legal sale; <SPAN href="#link44note-64"
name="link44noteref-64" id="link44noteref-64">64</SPAN> and he consulted
nature for the age of puberty, without confining his definition to the
precise period of twelve or fourteen years. <SPAN href="#link44note-65"
name="link44noteref-65" id="link44noteref-65">65</SPAN> This opposition of
sentiments was propagated in the writings and lessons of the two founders;
the schools of Capito and Labeo maintained their inveterate conflict from
the age of Augustus to that of Adrian; <SPAN href="#link44note-66"
name="link44noteref-66" id="link44noteref-66">66</SPAN> and the two sects
derived their appellations from Sabinus and Proculus, their most
celebrated teachers. The names of Cassians and Pegasians were likewise
applied to the same parties; but, by a strange reverse, the popular cause
was in the hands of Pegasus, <SPAN href="#link44note-67"
name="link44noteref-67" id="link44noteref-67">67</SPAN> a timid slave of
Domitian, while the favorite of the Caesars was represented by Cassius, <SPAN href="#link44note-68" name="link44noteref-68" id="link44noteref-68">68</SPAN>
who gloried in his descent from the patriot assassin. By the perpetual
edict, the controversies of the sects were in a great measure determined.
For that important work, the emperor Adrian preferred the chief of the
Sabinians: the friends of monarchy prevailed; but the moderation of
Salvius Julian insensibly reconciled the victors and the vanquished. Like
the contemporary philosophers, the lawyers of the age of the Antonines
disclaimed the authority of a master, and adopted from every system the
most probable doctrines. <SPAN href="#link44note-69" name="link44noteref-69" id="link44noteref-69">69</SPAN> But their writings would have been less
voluminous, had their choice been more unanimous. The conscience of the
judge was perplexed by the number and weight of discordant testimonies,
and every sentence that his passion or interest might pronounce was
justified by the sanction of some venerable name. An indulgent edict of
the younger Theodosius excused him from the labor of comparing and
weighing their arguments. Five civilians, Caius, Papinian, Paul, Ulpian,
and Modestinus, were established as the oracles of jurisprudence: a
majority was decisive: but if their opinions were equally divided, a
casting vote was ascribed to the superior wisdom of Papinian. <SPAN href="#link44note-70" name="link44noteref-70" id="link44noteref-70">70</SPAN></p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-62" id="link44note-62">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
62 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-62">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ I have perused the
Diatribe of Gotfridus Mascovius, the learned Mascou, de Sectis
Jurisconsultorum, (Lipsiae, 1728, in 12mo., p. 276,) a learned treatise on
a narrow and barren ground.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-63" id="link44note-63">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
63 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-63">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ See the character of
Antistius Labeo in Tacitus, (Annal. iii. 75,) and in an epistle of Ateius
Capito, (Aul. Gellius, xiii. 12,) who accuses his rival of libertas nimia
et vecors. Yet Horace would not have lashed a virtuous and respectable
senator; and I must adopt the emendation of Bentley, who reads Labieno
insanior, (Serm. I. iii. 82.) See Mascou, de Sectis, (c. i. p. 1—24.)]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-64" id="link44note-64">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
64 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-64">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Justinian (Institut. l.
iii. tit. 23, and Theophil. Vers. Graec. p. 677, 680) has commemorated
this weighty dispute, and the verses of Homer that were alleged on either
side as legal authorities. It was decided by Paul, (leg. 33, ad Edict. in
Pandect. l. xviii. tit. i. leg. 1,) since, in a simple exchange, the buyer
could not be discriminated from the seller.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-65" id="link44note-65">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
65 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-65">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ This controversy was
likewise given for the Proculians, to supersede the indecency of a search,
and to comply with the aphorism of Hippocrates, who was attached to the
septenary number of two weeks of years, or 700 of days, (Institut. l. i.
tit. xxii.) Plutarch and the Stoics (de Placit. Philosoph. l. v. c. 24)
assign a more natural reason. Fourteen years is the age. See the vestigia
of the sects in Mascou, c. ix. p. 145—276.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-66" id="link44note-66">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
66 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-66">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ The series and
conclusion of the sects are described by Mascou, (c. ii.—vii. p. 24—120;)
and it would be almost ridiculous to praise his equal justice to these
obsolete sects. * Note: The work of Gaius, subsequent to the time of
Adrian, furnishes us with some information on this subject. The disputes
which rose between these two sects appear to have been very numerous.
Gaius avows himself a disciple of Sabinus and of Caius. Compare Hugo, vol.
ii. p. 106.—W.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-67" id="link44note-67">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
67 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-67">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ At the first summons he
flies to the turbot-council; yet Juvenal (Satir. iv. 75—81) styles
the praefect or bailiff of Rome sanctissimus legum interpres. From his
science, says the old scholiast, he was called, not a man, but a book. He
derived the singular name of Pegasus from the galley which his father
commanded.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-68" id="link44note-68">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
68 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-68">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Tacit. Annal. xvii. 7.
Sueton. in Nerone, c. xxxvii.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-69" id="link44note-69">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
69 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-69">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ Mascou, de Sectis, c.
viii. p. 120—144 de Herciscundis, a legal term which was applied to
these eclectic lawyers: herciscere is synonymous to dividere. * Note: This
word has never existed. Cujacius is the author of it, who read me words
terris condi in Servius ad Virg. herciscundi, to which he gave an
erroneous interpretation.—W.]</p>
<p><SPAN name="link44note-70" id="link44note-70">
<!-- Note --></SPAN></p>
<p class="foot">
70 (<SPAN href="#link44noteref-70">return</SPAN>)<br/> [ See the Theodosian
Code, l. i. tit. iv. with Godefroy's Commentary, tom. i. p. 30—35.
[! This decree might give occasion to Jesuitical disputes like those in
the Lettres Provinciales, whether a Judge was obliged to follow the
opinion of Papinian, or of a majority, against his judgment, against his
conscience, &c. Yet a legislator might give that opinion, however
false, the validity, not of truth, but of law. Note: We possess (since
1824) some interesting information as to the framing of the Theodosian
Code, and its ratification at Rome, in the year 438. M. Closius, now
professor at Dorpat in Russia, and M. Peyron, member of the Academy of
Turin, have discovered, the one at Milan, the other at Turin, a great part
of the five first books of the Code which were wanting, and besides this,
the reports (gesta) of the sitting of the senate at Rome, in which the
Code was published, in the year after the marriage of Valentinian III.
Among these pieces are the constitutions which nominate commissioners for
the formation of the Code; and though there are many points of
considerable obscurity in these documents, they communicate many facts
relative to this legislation. 1. That Theodosius designed a great reform
in the legislation; to add to the Gregorian and Hermogenian codes all the
new constitutions from Constantine to his own day; and to frame a second
code for common use with extracts from the three codes, and from the works
of the civil lawyers. All laws either abrogated or fallen into disuse were
to be noted under their proper heads. 2. An Ordinance was issued in 429 to
form a commission for this purpose of nine persons, of which Antiochus, as
quaestor and praefectus, was president. A second commission of sixteen
members was issued in 435 under the same president. 3. A code, which we
possess under the name of Codex Theodosianus, was finished in 438,
published in the East, in an ordinance addressed to the Praetorian
praefect, Florentinus, and intended to be published in the West. 4. Before
it was published in the West, Valentinian submitted it to the senate.
There is a report of the proceedings of the senate, which closed with loud
acclamations and gratulations.—From Warnkonig, Histoire du Droit
Romain, p. 169-Wenck has published this work, Codicis Theodosiani libri
priores. Leipzig, 1825.—M.] * Note *: Closius of Tubingen
communicated to M.Warnkonig the two following constitutions of the emperor
Constantine, which he discovered in the Ambrosian library at Milan:—
1. Imper. Constantinus Aug. ad Maximium Praef. Praetorio. Perpetuas
prudentum contentiones eruere cupientes, Ulpiani ac Pauli, in Papinianum
notas, qui dum ingenii laudem sectantur, non tam corrigere eum quam
depravere maluerunt, aboleri praecepimus. Dat. III. Kalend. Octob. Const.
Cons. et Crispi, (321.) Idem. Aug. ad Maximium Praef Praet. Universa, quae
scriptura Pauli continentur, recepta auctoritate firmanda runt, et omni
veneratione celebranda. Ideoque sententiarum libros plepissima luce et
perfectissima elocutione et justissima juris ratione succinctos in
judiciis prolatos valere minimie dubitatur. Dat. V. Kalend. Oct. Trovia
Coust. et Max. Coss. (327.)—W]</p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />