[MACER libro primo de appellationibus. ] §2.8.15.prSciendum est possessores immobilium rerum satisdare non compelli.
[MACER, in the first book on Appeals.] It must be known that possessors of immovable property are not compelled to give security.
§2.8.15.1Possessor autem is accipiendus est, qui in agro uel ciuitate rem soli possidet aut ex asse aut pro parte.
Moreover, he is to be accepted as a possessor who possesses a piece of land in the country or in the city, either in its entirety or in part.
sed et qui uectigalem, id est emphyteuticum agrum possidet, possessor intellegitur.
But also he who possesses a tributary, that is, emphyteutic land, is understood to be a possessor.
item qui solam proprietatem habet, possessor intellegendus est.
Likewise, he who has the bare ownership is to be understood as a possessor.
eum uero, qui tantum usum fructum habet, possessorem non esse Ulpianus scripsit.
On the other hand, Ulpian wrote that he who has only the usufruct is not a possessor.
§2.8.15.2Creditor, qui pignus accepit, possessor non est, tametsi possessionem habeat aut sibi traditam aut precario debitori concessam.
A creditor who has received a pledge is not a possessor, even if he has possession, whether it was delivered to himself or granted precariously to the debtor.
§2.8.15.3Si fundus in dotem datus sit, tam uxor quam maritus propter possessionem eius fundi possessores intelleguntur.
If a tract of land has been given as a dowry, both the wife and the husband are understood to be possessors on account of the possession of that land.
§2.8.15.4Diuersa causa est eius, qui fundi petitionem personalem habet.
Different is the case of him who has a personal action for the recovery of a tract of land.
§2.8.15.5Tutores, siue pupilli eorum siue ipsi possideant, possessorum loco habentur: sed et si unus ex tutoribus possessor fuit, idem dicendum erit.
Guardians, whether their pupils or they themselves possess, are regarded in the place of possessors; but also if only one of the guardians was a possessor, the same must be said.
§2.8.15.6Si fundum, quem possidebam, a me petieris, deinde cum secundum te esset iudicatum, appellauerim: an possessor eiusdem fundi sim? et recte dicetur possessorem me esse, quia nihilominus possideo, nec ad rem pertinet, quod euinci mihi ea possessio possit.
If you demand from me a tract of land which I was possessing, and then, after judgment was given in your favor, I have appealed: am I the possessor of the same land? And it will be rightly said that I am a possessor, because I possess nonetheless, nor does it matter to the case that this possession can be evicted from me.
§2.8.15.7Possessor autem quis nec ne fuerit, tempus cautionis spectandum est: nam sicuti ei, qui post cautionem possessionem uendidit, nihil obest, ita nec prodest ei, qui post cautionem possidere coepit.
Moreover, as to whether someone was a possessor or not, the time of giving security must be regarded; for just as it does not harm him who sold the possession after giving security, so it does not benefit him who began to possess after giving security.