[PAULUS libro quinquagensimo quarto ad edictum. ] §41.3.4.15eres, qui in ius defuncti succedit, licet apud eum ignorantem ancillam furtiuam esse conceperit ea et pepererit, non tamen usucapiet.
[PAULUS, On the Edict, book 54] An heir, who succeeds to the right of the deceased, although the stolen female slave conceived and gave birth in his house while he was ignorant of the theft, will nevertheless not usucapt.
§41.3.4.16De illo quaeritur, si seruus meus ancillam, quam subripuit, pro libertate sua mihi dederit, an partum apud me conceptum usucapere possim.
On this point it is asked: if my slave gives me a female slave whom he stole in exchange for his freedom, whether I can usucapt the offspring conceived in my house.
Sabinus et Cassius non putant, quia possessio, quam seruus uitiose nanctus sit, domino noceret, et hoc uerum est.
Sabinus and Cassius do not think so, because possession which a slave has obtained defectively would harm the owner; and this is correct.
§41.3.4.17Sed et si, ut seruum meum manumitterem, alius mihi furtiuam ancillam dederit eaque apud me conceperit et pepererit, usu me non capturum.
But also, if someone else gives me a stolen female slave so that I may manumit my slave, and she conceives and gives birth in my house, I will not usucapt.
idemque fore etiam, si quis eam ancillam mecum permutasset aut in solutum dedisset, item si donasset.
And the same will also happen if someone has exchanged that female slave with me, or given her in lieu of payment, or likewise if he has donated her.
§41.3.4.18Si antequam pariat, alienam esse rescierit emptor, diximus non posse eum usucapere: quod si nescierit, posse.
If, before she gives birth, the buyer finds out that she belongs to another, we have said that he cannot usucapt; but if he did not know, he can.
quod si, cum iam usucaperet, cognouerit alienam esse, initium usucapionis intueri debemus, sicut in emptis rebus placuit.
But if, while he was already usucapting, he found out that she belongs to another, we must look at the beginning of the usucaption, just as has been decided in the case of bought things.
§41.3.4.19Lana ouium furtiuarum si quidem apud furem detonsa est, usucapi non potest, si uero apud bonae fidei emptorem, contra: quoniam in fructu est, nec usucapi debet, sed statim emptoris fit.
If the wool of stolen sheep is shorn while in the possession of the thief, it cannot be usucapted; but if it is shorn while in the possession of a bona fide buyer, the contrary is true: since it is counted as fruit, it ought not to be usucapted, but immediately becomes the property of the buyer.
idem in agnis dicendum, si consumpti sint, quod uerum est.
The same must be said of lambs if they have been consumed, which is correct.
§41.3.4.20Si ex lana furtiua uestimentum feceris, uerius est, ut substantiam spectemus, et ideo uestis furtiua erit.
If you make a garment from stolen wool, it is more correct that we look at the substance, and therefore the garment will be a stolen thing.
§41.3.4.21Si rem pignori datam debitor subripuerit et uendiderit, usucapi eam posse Cassius scribit, quia in potestatem domini uidetur peruenisse, qui pignori dederit, quamuis cum eo furti agi potest: quod puto rectius dici.
If a debtor steals and sells a thing given in pledge, Cassius writes that it can be usucapted, because it is considered to have come into the power of the owner who gave it in pledge, although an action for theft can be brought against him; which I think is more correctly said.
§41.3.4.22Si tu me ui expuleris de fundi possessione nec adprehenderis possessionem, sed Titius in uacuam possessionem intrauerit, potest longo tempore capi res: quamuis enim interdictum unde ui locum habeat, quia uerum est ui me deiectum, non tamen uerum est et ui possessum.
If you violently expel me from the possession of a tract of land and do not take possession of it yourself, but Titius enters into the vacant possession, the thing can be acquired by long usage; for although the interdict unde vi has place, because it is true that I was ejected by force, it is nevertheless not true that possession was also held by force.
§41.3.4.23Ceterum etiamsi mala fide fundum me possidentem deieceris et uendideris, non poterit capi, quoniam uerum est ui possessum esse licet non a domino.
But even if you eject me while I am in possession of the land in bad faith and sell it, it cannot be acquired, because it is true that possession was held by force, even if not from the owner.
§41.3.4.24Idem dicendum est in eo, qui eum expulit qui pro herede possidebat, quamuis sciat esse hereditarium, quoniam ui possidet.
The same must be said of him who expels one possessing as an heir, although he knows that it belongs to the inheritance, because he possesses by force.
§41.3.4.25Si dominus fundi possessorem ui deiecerit, Cassius ait non uideri in potestatem eius redisse, quando interdicto unde ui restituturus sit possessionem.
If the owner of a tract of land violently ejects the possessor, Cassius says that it is not considered to have returned to his power, since he is to restore possession under the interdict unde vi.
§41.3.4.26Si uiam habeam per tuum fundum et tu me ab ea ui expuleris, per longum tempus non utendo amittam uiam, quia nec possideri intellegitur ius incorporale nec de uia quis (id est mero iure) detruditur.
If I have a right of way through your land and you violently expel me from it, I shall lose the right of way by non-use over a long period, because an incorporeal right is not understood to be possessed, nor is anyone driven out of a right of way (that is, from a mere right).
§41.3.4.27Item si occupaueris uacuam possessionem, deinde uenientem dominum prohibueris, non uideberis ui possedisse.
Likewise, if you occupy a vacant possession and then block the owner when he arrives, you will not be considered to have possessed by force.
§41.3.4.28Libertatem seruitutium usucapi posse uerius est, quia eam usucapionem sustulit lex Scribonia, quae seruitutem constituebat, non etiam eam, quae libertatem praestat sublata seruitute.
It is more correct that freedom from servitudes can be usucapted, because the Lex Scribonia abolished that usucaption which established a servitude, but not also that which provides freedom when a servitude is extinguished.
itaque si, cum tibi seruitutem deberem, ne mihi puta liceret altius aedificare, et per statutum tempus altius aedificatum habuero, sublata erit seruitus.
Therefore, if, when I owed you a servitude, for example, that I should not be allowed to build higher, and I have held it built higher for the statutory period, the servitude will be extinguished.