[SCAEUOLA libro quinto quaestionum. ] §37.6.10.prSi filius in potestate heres institutus adeat et emancipato petente bonorum possessionem contra tabulas ipse non petat, nec conferendum est ei: et ita edictum se habet SCAEUOLA: sed magis sentio, ut, quemadmodum pro parte hereditatem retinet iure eo, quod bonorum possessionem petere posset, ita et conferri ei debeat, utique cum iniuriam per bonorum possessionem patiatur.
[SCAEVOLA, from the fifth book of Questions.] If a son under power, having been instituted as heir, enters upon the inheritance, and when an emancipated son requests the possession of goods contrary to the will, he himself does not request it, there is no need for contribution to be made to him; and the Edict is so formulated (Scaevola says). But I am rather of the opinion that, just as he retains a share of the inheritance by that right because he could have requested the possession of goods, so also contribution ought to be made to him, especially since he suffers injury through the possession of goods.