[PAULUS libro tertio decretorum. ] §48.18.20.prMaritus quidam heres uxoris suae petebat a Suro pecuniam, quam apud eum deposuisse defunctam se absente dicebat, et in eam rem unum testem liberti sui filium produxerat apud procuratorem: desideraverat et quaestionem haberi de ancilla.
[PAULUS, in the third book of Decrees] A certain husband, the heir of his wife, was claiming from Surus a sum of money which he said the deceased had deposited with him in his absence, and had produced before the procurator a single witness for this matter, the son of his own freedman; he had also requested that an inquiry be held regarding a female slave.
Surus negabat se accepisse et testimonium non oportere unius hominis admitti nec solere a quaestionibus incipi, etsi aliena esset ancilla.
Surus denied that he had received it, and argued that the testimony of a single person ought not to be admitted, and that it was not customary to begin with inquiries, even if the slave belonged to another.
procurator quaestionem de ancilla habuerat.
The procurator had held the inquiry regarding the female slave.
cum ex appellatione cognovisset imperator, pronuntiavit quaestione illicite habita unius testimonio non esse credendum ideoque recte prouocatum.
When the emperor took cognizance of the case on appeal, he pronounced that, as the inquiry had been unlawfully held, the testimony of a single person should not be believed, and therefore the appeal was justified.