the common law-第62节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ot　in　the　direct　line　of　the　argument；　it　lays　a　foundation　for　it　by　showing　the　course　of　development　in　different　fields。

The　obvious　analogy　between　purchaser　and　heir　seems　to　have　been　used　in　the　folk…laws；　but　mainly　for　another　purpose　than　those　which　will　have　to　be　considered　in　the　English　law。　This　was　to　enlarge　the　sphere　of　alienability。　It　will　be　remembered　that　there　are　many　traces　of　family　ownership　in　early　German；　as　well　as　in　early　Roman　law；　and　it　would　seem　that　the　transfer　＇356＇　of　property　which　originally　could　not　be　given　outside　the　family；　was　worked　out　through　the　form　of　making　the　grantee　an　heir。

The　history　of　language　points　to　this　conclusion。　Heres；　as　Beseler　/1/　and　others　have　remarked；　from　meaning　a　successor　to　the　property　of　a　person　deceased；　was　extended　to　the　donee　mortis　causa；　and　even　more　broadly　to　grantees　in　general。　Hereditare　was　used　in　like　manner　for　the　transfer　of　land。　Hevin　is　quoted　by　Laferriere　/2/　as　calling　attention　to　the　fact　that　the　ancient　usage　was　to　say　heriter　for　purchase；　heritier　for　purchaser；　and　desheriter　for　sell。

The　texts　of　the　Salic　law　give　us　incontrovertible　evidence。　A　man　might　transfer　the　whole　or　any　part　of　his　property　/3/　by　delivering　possession　of　it　to　a　trustee　who；　within　twelve　months；　handed　it　over　to　the　beneficiaries。　/4/　To　those；　the　text　reads；　whom　the　donor　has　named　heredes　（quos　heredes　appellavit）。　Here　then　was　a　voluntary　transfer　of　more　or　less　property　at　pleasure　to　persons　freely　chosen；　who　were　not　necessarily　universal　successors；　if　they　ever　were；　and　who　nevertheless　took　under　the　name　heredes。　The　word；　which　must　have　meant　at　first　persons　taking　by　descent；　was　extended　to　persons　taking　by　purchase。　/5/　If　the　word　became　enlarged　in　meaning；　it　is　probably　because　the　thought　which　it　conveyed　was　turned　to　new　uses。　The　transaction　seems　＇357＇　to　have　fallen　half…way　between　the　institution　of　an　heir　and　a　sale。　The　later　law　of　the　Ripuarian　Franks　treats　it　more　distinctly　from　the　former　point　of　view。　It　permits　a　man　who　has　no　sons　to　give　all　his　property　to　whomsoever　he　chooses；　whether　relatives　or　strangers；　as　inheritance；　either　by　way　of　adfathamire；　as　the　Salic　form　was　called；　or　by　writing　or　delivery。　/1/

The　Lombards　had　a　similar　transfer；　in　which　the　donee　was　not　only　called　heres；　but　was　made　liable　like　an　heir　for　the　debts　of　the　donor　on　receiving　the　property　after　the　donor's　death。　/2/2　By　the　Salic　law　a　man　who　could　not　pay　the　wergeld　was　allowed　to　transfer　formally　his　house…lot；　and　with　it　the　liability。　But　the　transfer　was　to　the　next　of　kin。　/3/

The　house…lot　or　family　curtilage　at　first　devolved　strictly　within　the　limits　of　the　family。　Here　again；　at　least　in　England；　freedom　of　alienation　seems　to　have　grown　up　by　gradually　increased　latitude　in　the　choice　of　successors。　If　we　may　trust　the　order　of　development　to　be　noticed　in　the　early　charters；　which　it　is　hard　to　believe　＇358＇　accidental；　although　the　charters　are　few；　royal　grants　at　first　permitted　an　election　of　heirs　among　the　kindred；　and　then　extended　it　beyond　them。　In　a　deed　of　the　year　679；　the　language　is；　〃as　it　is　granted　so　do　you　hold　it　and　your　posterity。〃　One　a　century　later　reads；　〃which　let　him　always　possess；　and　after　his　death　leave　to　which　of　his　heirs　he　will。〃　Another；　〃and　after　him　with　free　power　（of　choice）　leave　to　the　man　of　his　kin　to　whom　he　wishes　to〃　（leave　it）。　A　somewhat　earlier　charter　of　736　goes　a　step　further：　〃So　that　as　long　as　he　lives　he　shall　have　the　power　of　holding　and　possessing　（and）　of　leaving　it　to　whomsoever　he　choose；　either　in　his　lifetime；　or　certainly　after　his　death。〃　At　the　beginning　of　the　ninth　century　the　donee　has　power　to　leave　the　property　to　whomsoever　he　will；　or；　in　still　broader　terms；　to　exchange　or　grant　in　his　lifetime；　and　after　his　death　to　leave　it　to　whom　he　chooses；or　to　sell；　exchange；　and　leave　to　whatsoever　heir　he　chooses。　/1/　This　choice　of　heirs　＇359＇　recalls　the　quos　heredes　appellavit　of　the　Salic　law　just　mentioned；　and　may　be　compared　with　the　language　of　a　Norman　charter　of　about　the　year　1190：　〃To　W。　and　his　heirs；　to　wit　those　whom　he　may　constitute　his　heirs。〃　/1/

A　perfect　example　of　a　singular　succession　worked　out　by　the　fiction　of　kinship　is　to　be　found　in　the　story　of　Burnt　Njal；　an　Icelandic　saga；　which　gives　us　a　living　picture　of　a　society　hardly　more　advanced　than　the　Salian　Franks；　as　we　see　them　in　the　Lex　Salica。　A　lawsuit　was　to　be　transferred　by　the　proper　plaintiff　to　another　more　versed　in　the　laws；　and　better　able　to　carry　it　on；　in　fact；　to　an　attorney。　But　a　lawsuit　was　at　that　time　the　alternative　of　a　feud；　and　both　were　the　peculiar　affair　of　the　family　concerned。　/2/　Accordingly；　when　a　suit　for　killing　a　member　of　the　family　was　to　be　handed　over　to　a　stranger；　the　innovation　had　to　be　reconciled　with　the　theory　that　such　suit　belonged　only　to　the　next　of　kin。　Mord　is　to　take　upon　himself　Thorgeir's　suit　against　Flosi　for　killing　Helgi；　and　the　form　of　transfer　is　described　as　follows。

〃Then　Mord　took　Thorgeir　by　the　hand　and　named　two　witnesses　to　bear　witness；　'that　Thorgeir　Thofir's　son　hands　me　over　a　suit　for　manslaughter　against　Flosi　Thord's　son；　to　plead　it　for　the　slaying　of　Helgi　Njal's　son；　with　all　those　proofs　which　have　to　follow　the　suit。　Thou　handest　over　to　me　this　suit　to　plead　and　to　settle；　and　to　enjoy　all　rights　in　it；　as　though　I　were　the　rightful　next　of　kin。　Thou　handest　it　over　to　me　by　law；　and　I　＇360＇　take　it　from　thee　by　law。'〃　Afterwards；　these　witnesses　come　before　the　court；　and　bear　witness　to　the　transfer　in　like　words：　〃He　handed　over　to　him　then　this　suit；　with　all　the　proofs　and　proceedings　which　belonged　to　the　suit；　he　handed　it　over　to　him　to　plead　and　to　settle；　and　to　make　use　of　all　rights；　as　though　he　were　the　rightful　next　of　kin。　Thorgeir　handed　it　over　lawfully；　and　Mord　took　it　lawfully。〃　The　suit　went　on；　notwithstanding　the　change　of　hands；　as　if　the　next　of　kin　were　plaintiff。　This　is　shown　by　a　further　step　in　the　proceedings。　The　defendant　challenges　two　of　the　court；　on　the　ground　of　their　connection　with　Mord；　the　transferee；　by　blood　and　by　baptism。　But　Mord　replies　that　this　is　no　good　challenge；　for　〃he　challenged　them　not　for　their　kinship　to　the　true　plaintiff；　the　next　of　kin；　but　for　their　kinship　to　him　who　pleaded　the　suit。〃　And　the　other　side　had　to　admit　that　Mord　was　right　in　his　law。

I　now　turn　from　the　German　to　the　Roman　sources。　These　have　the　closest　connection　with　the　argument；　because　much　of　the　doctrine　to　be　found　there　has　been　transplanted　unchanged　into　modern　law。

The　early　Roman　law　only　recognized　as　relatives　those　who　would　have　been　members　of　the　same　patriarchal　family；　and　under　the　same　patriarchal　authority；　had　the　common　ancestor　survived。　As　wives　passed　into　the　families　of　their　husbands；　and　lost　all　connection　with　that　in　which　they　were　born；　relationship　through　females　was　altogether　excluded。　The　heir　was　one　who　traced　his　relationship　to　the　deceased　through　males　alone。　With　the　advance　of　civilization　this　rule　was　changed。　The　praetor　gave　the　benefits　of　the　inheritance　to　the　blood　relations；　although　they　were　not　heirs；　and　could　＇361＇　not　be　admitted　to　the　succession　according　to　the　ancient　law。　/1/　But　the　change　was　not　brought　about　by　repealing　the　old　law；　which　still　subsisted　under　the　name　of　the　jus　civile。　The　new　principle　was　accommodated　to　the　old　forms　by　a　fiction。　The　blood　relation　could　sue　on　the　fiction　that　he　was　an　heir；　although　he　was　not　one　in　fact。　/2/

One　the　early　forms　of　instituting　an　heir　was　a　sale　of　the　familia　or　headship　of　the　family　to　the　intended　heir；　with　all　its　rights　and　duties。　/3/　This　sale　of　the　universitas　was　afterwards　extended　beyond　the　case　of　inheritance　to　that　of　bankruptcy；　when　it　was　desired　to　put　the　bankrupt's　property　into　the　hands　of　a　trustee　for　distribution。　This　trustee　also　could　make　use　of　the　fiction；　and　sue　as　if　he　had　been　the　bankrupt's　heir。　/4/　We　are　told　by　one　of　the　great　jurisconsults　that　in　general　universal　successors　stand　in　the　place　of　heirs。　/5/

The　Roman　heir；　with　one　or　two　exceptions；　was　always　a　universal　successor；　and　the　fiction　of　heirship；　as　such；　could　hardly　be　used　with　propriety　except　to　enlarge　the　sphere　of　universal　successions。　So　far　as　it　extended；　however；　all　the　consequences　attached　to　the　original　fiction　of　identity　between　heir　and　ancestor　followed　as　of　course。

＇362＇　To　recur　to　the　case　of　rights　acquired　by　prescription；　every　universal　successor　could　add　the　time　of　his　predecessor's　adverse　use　to　his　own　in　order　to　make　out　the　right。　There　was　no　addition；　legally　speaking；　but　one　continuous　possession。

The　express　fiction　of　inheritance　perhaps　stopped　here。　But　when　a　similar　joinder　of　times　was　allowed　between　a　legatee　or　devisee　（legatarius）　and　his　testator；　the　same　explanation　was　offered。　It　was　said；　that；　when　a　specific　thing　was　left　to　a　person　by　will；　so　far　as　concerned　having　the　benefit　of　the　time　during　which　the　testator　had　been　in　possession　for　the　purpose　o