[MAECIANUS libro quinto decimo fideicommissorum. ] §40.5.35.prGaii Cassii non est recepta sententia existimantis et heredi et legatario remittendam interdum proprii serui manumittendi necessitatem, si uel usus tam necessarius esset, ut eo carere non expediret, ueluti dispensatoris paedagogiue liberorum, uel tantum delictum est, ut ultio remittenda non esset: uisum est enim ipsos in sua potestate habuisse: nam potuissent discedere a causa testamenti: qua non omissa debere uoluntati defuncti obsequi.
[MAECIANUS libro quinto decimo fideicommissorum.] The opinion of Gaius Cassius has not been accepted, who thought that the necessity of manumitting one's own slave should sometimes be remitted both for the heir and the legatee, if either the service of the slave was so necessary that it would not be expedient to do without him (such as that of a dispensator or a paedagogus of the children), or the offense was so great that punishment ought not to be remitted; for it was held that they themselves had it in their own power, since they could have withdrawn from the cause of the will; and since they did not abandon it, they ought to comply with the will of the deceased.