[IAUOLENUS libro primo ex Plautio. ] §23.3.57.prNuptura filio familias si socero dotem ita promiserit: 'quod filius tuus mihi debet, id doti tibi erit', interesse puto, utrum filii obligatio an patris persecutio et in rem uersum promissioni contineatur.
[IAUOLENUS in the first book on Plautius.] If a woman about to marry a filius familias has promised a dowry to her father-in-law in this way: 'What your son owes me shall be as a dowry to you,' I think it matters whether the obligation of the son or the pursuit against the father with respect to the peculium and what has been turned to his benefit is contained in the promise.
nam si id quod filium dare oportet significatum est, tota pecunia, in quam filius obligatus est, promissioni dotis continebitur: sin autem id, quod patrem de peculio uel in rem uerso praestare oportebit, aestimare debebit quantum sit eo tempore id quod promittitur, ut ea summa dotis esse uideatur, qua patrem eo tempore filii nomine condemnari oportebit.
For if that which the son ought to give is meant, the whole sum of money in which the son is obligated will be contained in the promise of the dowry; but if, on the other hand, that which the father will have to perform from the peculium or to the extent of what has been turned to his benefit is meant, one will have to estimate how much that which is promised is at that time, so that that sum may be deemed to be the dowry which the father ought at that time to be condemned to pay on behalf of the son.
quod si non euidenter apparuit, de cuius mulier obligatione sensit, praesumptionem ad filii debitum spectare uerisimile est, nisi euidentissime contrarium adprobetur.
But if it has not clearly appeared whose obligation the woman had in mind, it is likely that the presumption looks to the debt of the son, unless the contrary is most clearly proved.