[PAULUS libro trigesimo quinto ad edictum. ] §23.3.41.prPromittendo dotem omnes obligantur, cuiuscumque sexus condicionisque sint. §23.3.41.1Sed si nuptiae secutae non fuerint, ex stipulatu agi non potest: magis enim res quam uerba intuenda sunt. §23.3.41.2Accepti quoque latione dos constituitur, cum debitori marito acceptum feratur dotis constituendae causa. §23.3.41.3Si a debitore mulieris sub condicione dos promittatur et postea, sed antequam maritus petere posset, debitor soluendo esse desierit, magis periculum ad mulierem pertinere placet: nec enim uideri maritum nomen secutum eo tempore, quo exigere non poterit.
[PAULUS in the thirty-fifth book on the edict.]\n\nBy promising a dowry, all persons are bound, of whatever sex and condition they may be.\n\nBut if marriage does not follow, an action cannot be brought on the stipulation; for the substance rather than the words must be regarded.\n\nA dowry is also established by a release (acceptilatio), when a release is given to a debtor husband for the purpose of establishing a dowry.\n\nIf a dowry is promised under a condition by a debtor of the woman, and afterwards, but before the husband is able to demand it, the debtor ceases to be solvent, it is held that the risk rather pertains to the woman; for the husband is not considered to have relied on the debt at a time when he could not exact it.
quod si iam tunc debitor, cum sub condicione promitteret, soluendo non fuerit, periculum uiri esse, quod sciens tale nomen secutus uideretur, quale initio obligationis fuerit. §23.3.41.4Si debitor mulieris dotem promiserit et mulierem heredem reliquerit, Labeo perinde habendum ait, ac si mulier ipsa dotem promisisset.
But if, at the very time when the debtor promised under a condition, he was already insolvent, the risk belongs to the husband, because he is considered to have knowingly relied on such a debt as it was at the beginning of the obligation.\n\nIf a debtor of the woman promises a dowry and leaves the woman as his heir, Labeo says that it should be treated just as if the woman herself had promised the dowry.
cuius sententiam Iulianus quoque probat: nec enim aequum esse ait, ut ei damnetur eius pecuniae nomine, quam ipsa debeat, et satis esse acceptilatione eam liberari.
Julian also approves his opinion; for he says that it is not equitable for her to be condemned to him on account of the money which she herself owes, and that it is sufficient for her to be released by acceptilatio.