[ULPIANUS libro trigesimo sexto ad Sabinum. ] §25.1.5.prQuod dicitur necessarias impensas dotem minuere, sic erit accipiendum, ut et Pomponius ait, non ut ipsae res corporaliter deminuantur, ut puta fundus uel quodcumque aliud corpus: etenim absurdum est deminutionem corporis fieri propter pecuniam.
[ULPIANUS, On Sabinus, book 36] The statement that necessary expenses diminish the dowry must be understood in this way, as Pomponius also says: not in the sense that the things themselves are physically diminished, as for example a tract of land or any other corporeal thing; for indeed, it is absurd that a physical reduction of a corporeal thing should occur on account of money.
ceterum haec res faciet desinere esse fundum dotalem uel partem eius.
Moreover, this thing will cause the land, or a part of it, to cease to be dotal land.
manebit igitur maritus in rerum detentationem, donec ei satisfiat: non enim ipso iure corporum, sed dotis fit deminutio.
Therefore, the husband will remain in possession of the things until he is satisfied; for the diminution occurs ipso iure, not of the corporeal things, but of the dowry.
ubi ergo admittimus deminutionem dotis ipso iure fieri? ubi non sunt corpora, sed pecunia: nam in pecunia ratio admittit deminutionem fieri.
Where, then, do we admit that the diminution of the dowry occurs ipso iure? Where there are no corporeal things, but money; for in the case of money, reason allows a diminution to take place.
proinde si aestimata corpora in dotem data sint, ipso iure dos deminuetur per inpensas necessarias.
Consequently, if valued corporeal things have been given as dowry, the dowry will be diminished ipso iure by necessary expenses.
hoc de his inpensis dictum est, quae in dotem ipsam factae sint: ceterum si exstrinsecus, non imminuent dotem.
This was said concerning those expenses which were made on the dowry itself; otherwise, if they are external, they will not diminish the dowry.
§25.1.5.1Sed si inpensis necessariis mulier satisfecerit, utrum dos crescat an uero dicimus ex integro uideri dotem? et ego, ubi pecunia est, non dubito dotem uideri creuisse.
But if the woman has satisfied the necessary expenses, does the dowry increase, or rather do we say that the dowry is seen as intact? And I, where there is money, do not doubt that the dowry is seen to have increased.
§25.1.5.2Si dos tota soluta sit non habita ratione inpensarum, uidendum est, an condici possit id, quod pro impensis necessariis compensari solet.
If the entire dowry has been paid without account being taken of the expenses, we must consider whether that which is usually compensated for necessary expenses can be recovered by condictio.
et Marcellus admittit condictioni esse locum: sed etsi plerique negent, tamen propter aequitatem Marcelli sententia admittenda est.
And Marcellus admits that there is room for a condictio; but even though most jurists deny this, nevertheless on account of equity Marcellus' opinion is to be accepted.
§25.1.5.3Utiles autem impensae sunt, quas maritus utiliter fecit, remque meliorem uxoris fecerit, hoc est dotem,
On the other hand, useful expenses are those which the husband has usefully incurred, and has made the wife's property—that is, the dowry—better,