[MARCELLUS libro singulari responsorum. ] §46.3.48.prTitia cum propter dotem bona mariti possideret, omnia pro domina egit, reditus exegit et mouentia distraxit: quaero, an ea, quae ex re mariti percepit, in dotem ei reputari debeant.
[MARCELLUS in the single book of Responses.] When Titia, on account of her dowry, was in possession of her husband's property, she did everything as if she were the owner, collected the rents, and disposed of the movables. I ask whether those things which she received from her husband's property ought to be credited to her against her dowry.
Marcellus respondit reputationem eius quod proponeretur non iniquam uideri: pro soluto enim magis habendum est, quod ex ea causa mulier percepit.
Marcellus replied that the crediting of what was proposed did not seem inequitable; for what the woman received from that cause should rather be held as paid.
sed si forte usurarum quoque rationem arbiter dotis reciperandae habere debuerit, ita est computandum, ut, prout quidque ad mulierem peruenit, non ex uniuersa summa decedat, sed prius in eam quantitatem, quam usurarum nomine mulierem consequi oportebat: quod non est iniquum.
But if, by chance, the arbitrator for recovering the dowry also had to take account of interest, it must be calculated in such a way that, as each thing comes to the woman, it does not deduct from the entire sum, but is first applied to that amount which the woman ought to have obtained under the name of interest; which is not inequitable.