[IAUOLENUS libro nono ex Cassio. ] §11.1.14.prSi is, cuius nomine noxae iudicium acceptum est, manente iudicio liber iudicatus est, reus absolui debet, nec quicquam interrogatio in iure facta proderit, quia eius personae, cuius nomine quis cum alio actionem habet, obligationem transferre potest in eum, qui in iure suum esse confitetur, uelut alienum seruum suum esse confitendo: liberi autem hominis nomine quia cum alio actio non est, ne per interrogationem quidem aut confessionem transferri poterit.
[JAVOLENUS, from the ninth book on Cassius.] If he, in whose name a noxal trial was undertaken, is adjudged free while the trial is pending, the defendant ought to be acquitted, nor will the interrogation conducted in court be of any avail; because one can transfer the liability of that person, in whose name someone has an action against another, to him who confesses in court that the person is his, for example, by confessing that another's slave is his own; but because there is no action against another in the name of a free man, it cannot be transferred even by interrogation or confession.
quo casu eueniet, ut non recte hominis liberi nomine actum sit cum eo qui confessus est.
In which case it will result that the action in the name of a free man was not correctly brought against him who confessed.
§11.1.14.1In totum autem confessiones ita ratae sunt, si id, quod in confessionem uenit, et ius et naturam recipere potest.
Generally, however, confessions are valid only if that which becomes the subject of the confession can admit both law and nature.