[ULPIANUS libro quarto decimo ad Sabinum. ] §38.4.1.prSenatus consulto, quod factum est Claudianis temporibus Uelleo Rufo et Osterio Scapula consulibus de adsignandis libertis in haec uerba cauetur: si, qui duos pluresue liberos iustis nuptiis quaesitos in potestate 'haberet, de liberto libertaue sua significasset, cuius ex liberis suis eum libertum eamue libertam esse uellet, is eaue, quandoque is, qui eum eamue manumisit inter uiuos uel testamento, in ciuitate esse desisset, solus ei patronus solaue patrona esset, perinde a tquesi ab eo eaue libertatem consecutus consecutaue est.
[ULPIANUS in the fourteenth book on Sabinus.] In the senatusconsult which was passed in the Claudian times when Velleus Rufus and Osterius Scapula were consuls, concerning the assignment of freedmen, it is provided in these words: "If anyone, having in his power two or more children acquired in lawful marriage, should indicate concerning his freedman or freedwoman, which of his children he wishes that freedman or freedwoman to belong to, that child alone, whenever the person who manumitted him or her either during life or by testament has ceased to be in the state, shall be his or her sole patron or sole patroness, just as if the freedman or freedwoman had obtained freedom from him or her.
utique, si ex liberis quis in ciuitate esse desisset neque ei liberi ulli essent, ceteris eius liberis qui manumisit perinde omnia iura seruentur, ac si nihil de eo liberto eaue liberta is parens significasset'. §38.4.1.1Quamuis singulari sermone senatus consultum scriptum est, tamen et pluribus liberis et plures libertos libertasue posse adsignari certum est.
In any case, if any of the children should cease to be in the state and have no children of his own, all rights shall be preserved for the other children of the manumitter, just as if that parent had indicated nothing concerning that freedman or freedwoman." Although the senatusconsult is written in the singular number, yet it is certain that assignments can be made both to several children and of several freedmen or freedwomen.
§38.4.1.2Is quoque libertus, qui apud hostes est, adsignari potest.
Even a freedman who is in the hands of the enemy can be assigned.
§38.4.1.3Adsignare autem quis potest quibuscumque uerbis uel nutu, uel testamento uel codicillis uel uinus.
Moreover, a person can assign by any words whatsoever or by a nod, whether by testament, by codicils, or during life.
§38.4.1.4Adimere adsignationem etiam nuda uoluntate poterit.
One can also revoke an assignment by mere intention.
§38.4.1.5Sed et si exheredato filio libertum quis adsignauerit, ualet adsignatio, nec nocet ei nota exheredationis quantum ad ius patronatus.
But even if anyone has assigned a freedman to a disinherited son, the assignment is valid, and the mark of disinherison does not harm him as far as the right of patronage is concerned.
§38.4.1.6Sed si post adsignationem fuerit exheredatus, non semper exheredatio adimet adsignationem, nisi hoc animo facta sit.
But if he is disinherited after the assignment, the disinherison will not always revoke the assignment, unless it was done with this intention.
§38.4.1.7Sed si is cui adsignatus est repudiauerit, puto uerius, quod et Marcellus scripsit, posse admitti fratres eius.
But if the person to whom the assignment was made rejects it, I think it is more correct, as Marcellus also wrote, that his brothers can be admitted.
§38.4.1.8Si sit ex patrono filius unus, ex altero duo et uni eorum libertus adsignatus est, uidendum, quot partes fiant hereditatis liberti, utrum tres, ut duas habeat is cui adsignatus est, id est suam et fratris, an uero aequales partes fiant, quoniam per adsignationem alius excluditur.
If there is one son from one patron, and two from another, and the freedman has been assigned to one of them, it must be considered how many parts of the inheritance of the freedman are made: whether three, so that the one to whom he was assigned has two parts, that is, his own and his brother's, or whether equal parts are made, since the other is excluded by the assignment.
et Iulianus libro septuagensimo quinto scripsit magis esse, ut bessem hic habeat, qui fratrem excludit: quod uerum est, quamdiu frater eius uiuat uel admitti potuit ad legitimam hereditatem: ceterum si fuerit capite minutus, aequales partes habebunt.
And Julianus wrote in his seventy-fifth book that it is better that he who excludes his brother should have two-thirds here: which is true as long as his brother lives or could be admitted to the statutory inheritance; but if his brother has suffered a loss of status, they will have equal parts.