[IDEM libro quadragesimo octauo ad Sabinum. ] §23.3.36.prDebitor mulieris iussu eius pecuniam uiro expromisit, deinde uir acceptam eam iussu mulieris fecit.
[THE SAME in the forty-eighth book on Sabinus.] A debtor of the woman, by her order, promised money to the husband; then the husband, by the order of the woman, formally released it.
res mulieri perit.
The loss falls on the woman.
hoc quomodo accipimus? utrum dotis nomine an et si alia ex causa? et uidetur de eo debitore dictum, qui dotis nomine promisit.
How do we understand this? Whether under the heading of dowry, or also if for some other reason? And it seems that this was said concerning that debtor who promised under the heading of dowry.
illud adhuc subest, utrum ante nuptias an post nuptias id factum sit: multum enim interesse uidetur.
This question still remains, whether this was done before the marriage or after the marriage; for it seems to make a great difference.
nam si secutis nuptiis id factum est, dote iam constituta maritus accepto ferendo perdit, si autem antequam nuptiae sequerentur, nihil uidetur doti constitutum esse.
For if this was done after the marriage had followed, the dowry having already been established, the husband loses it by formal release; but if before the marriage followed, nothing seems to have been established as dowry.