Page 97 - index
P. 97

mean  an  aliquot  part.  Traces  of  this  fanciful rcndcring
                                    are found  in subseqiient  n.ritcm,  beconiing  howcvrr ver).
                                    faint  in  lat,er times.  Indeed  this  constniction  does  not
                                    seem  to have heen  persisted  in, thoiigh  it may have had
                                     some influence in moulding the iaw as it ult~imtely prevai-
                                     led in the Northern Parliaments of  Franre before  the Ordi-
                                     ?lance of  Louis XT  ', in 1731.
                                       It is to he collectcd froni the passages citecl from Cujas
                                     an aut,hor of  great  aiithority, ivho nriote in the sisteenth
                                     ccntuiy, that  a  donation  was  not revokcd  hy  the  Iaw  of
                                     France  unless il  nrere "immensa-"  or "immodica".  He
                                    puts the case of  a man nrho, when childless gave a sisth of
                                     hi8 property to his brother,  and afterwards  hnd  a  son,
                                     and thcn in answer ta the proposition that Ilg thc Iaw "Si
                                     unquarn"  thc sori coiild ievokc the gift says :-
                                       "Fallacia  est iii propositionr; ncc eriiin est abrolut~ hoc
                                     'C
                                      veriim donationeiii filium postea siiacrptiiiii icvocarr; sed
                                     'f.
                                      itu distingiicndiini est;aut immensa est donatio,aut non,
                                     "et  aut mera est donntio, aut non; iiiirnensam donationem
                                     "liberi  postea  siiscepti  revocant;  hic  non  fuit  immeass,
                                     "sed  sextnntem  tantum  donavit".  Cujncius, Opera Postu-
                                     '<mal 9 Vol, :3lc. (cited at the Bar fiorn en cditiori piililishcd
                                    in Naples,  17381.
                                       Ciijas, thei.rfore,was of  opinion thal the  gift  of  a 3ixtli
                                     part of  thc donor's pmpcrty nrould not ho  "imiicnsa".   1 t
                                     was argucd that the aut,hority of  Cujas is weakciicd ht.caii-
                                    se he confused the lair, "Si  unquani"  with  the Lex Falci-
                                     dia.  It is truc that he rcfrrs to the I.?x Falcidia in other
                                    pasfiages! as hwring on his viciv of  the Iaw  "Si unquarn",
                                    hut it is not at al1 likely tliat 50 grrat ii Iawyer \vi.oiil<l hava
                                    heen in niiy confimion of  ~nind with regard  to t,liei.(i  la~v~,
                                      In Merlin. Rép, Vo. Donation, Sec. 7, tht: state of  t,hr old
                                    law iii ndverted to ss follows :-
                                      Avant  la  promulgation  de  I'oidoiinaricr  de  1731,  on
                                    " .
                                      disputait  bcauc«~ip sui. la question de savoir jusqu'oii de-
                                    "vait  s'étendre  une  donation  pour  qu'elle  fat  sujette à
                                    "
                                     &tre r6voqiiPc paisurvenanre d'eiifants,les  uns voulaient
   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102