lege conferred upon certain cities, women belonging to them transmitted their citizenship to their legitimate children; 4 and it is not clear from the texts which have come down to us whether in such case the child took citizenship only in the native town of his mother or in both places. This exception is of little importance to us beyond this, that it conclusively demonstrates that the citizenship of the parent and not the domicil (which in the case of a married woman was always that of her husband 6) was the basis upon which the jus originis of the child rested.

Illegitimate children acquired by origo citizenship in the town to which the mother belonged."

Second, by Adoption. — Adoption conferred a cumulative citizenship upon the adopted person. For while he retained his former citizenship with all its incidents, he gained also that of his adoptive father, and this double citizenship was transmitted also to the children of the adopted son.8 But as this anomalous condition of cumulative citizenship began with and depended upon the artificial relation created by adoption, so it ceased upon the destruction of that relation by emancipation.9

Code 10, t. 31, 1. 36, and see infra, next in itself the more probable. Op. cit. § 351, note i.

note.

4 Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 1, § 2. "Qui ex duobus igitur Campanis parentibus natus est, Campanus est. Sed si ex patre Campano, matre Puteolana, æque municeps Campanus est; nisi forte privilegio aliquo materna origo censeatur; tunc enim maternæ originis erit municeps. Utputa Iliensibus concessum est, ut qui matre Iliensi est, sit eorum municeps. Etiam Delphis hoc idem tributum et conservatum est. Celsus etiam refert, Ponticis ex beneficii Pompeii Magni competere, ut qui Pontica matre natus esset, Ponticus esset. Quod beneficium ad vulgo quæsitos solos pertinere quidam putant; quorum sententiam Celsus non probat; neque enim debuisse caveri, ut vulgo quæsitus matris conditionem sequeretur; quam enim aliam originem hic habet? sed ad eos, qui ex diversarum civitatium parentibus orirentur." 5 Savigny considers the latter opinion

6 See infra, § 210.

8

7 Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 9. "Ejus, qui justum patrem non habet, prima origo a matre eoque die, quo ex ea editus est, numerari debet." See also Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 1, § 2. Supra, § 3, n. 4. Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 15, § 8. "Jus originis in honoribus obeundis ac muneribus suscipiendis, adoptione non mutatur; sed novis quoque muneribus filius per adoptivum patrem adstringitur." And Dig. 50, t. 1, l. 17, § 9. "In adoptiva familia susceptum, exemplo dati, muneribus civilibus apud originem avi quoque naturalis respondere, D. Pio placuit; quamvis in isto fraudis nec suspicio quidem interveniret."

Third, by Manumission. The freedman by manumission acquired citizenship in the native town of his patron; 10 and. this also descended to his children. If the patron had citizenship in several places, or if the common slave of several masters 12 were manumitted by them, then a plural citizenship might arise by manumission. But only by complete manumission was thus acquired citizenship which imperfect manumission did not confer.13

14

Fourth, by Allection. The last mode of acquiring citizenship was by allection. This subject is involved in much obscurity. It has been thought by some that this was not a distinct mode, but that allectio is only another name for adoptio. Cujas 14 cites from manuscripts (without however approving) a reading of the text contained in the Code different from that given above, namely, "allectio, id est, adoptio;" and some color. has been given to this reading by the entire omission of allectio in the text contained in the Digest. But it is not usually accepted; and although authority in the Roman law sources is wanting, Savigny 15 holds that by allectio "is to be understood the free gift of citizenship by the municipal magistrates, of the legality of which there could be no doubt even if it were not expressly attested." Without authority it certainly seems reasonable that the power to admit citizens must have

unde, quæ te manumisit, fuit. Eorum enim conditionem sequi ex causa fidei commissi manumissos pridem placuit, qui libertatem præstiterint, non qui dari rogaverint." See also the next two notes.

10 Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 6, § 3. "Liber- ditionis ejusque civitatis jus obtines, tini originem patronum vel domicilium sequuntur; item qui ex his nascuntur." Jd. 1. 22, pr. "Filii libertorum, libertarumque, liberti et patroni manumissoris domicilium aut originem sequuntur." Id. 1. 37, § 1. "Libertos eo loco munus facere debere, unde patrona erit, et ubi ipsi domicilium habebunt, placet."

Id. t. 4, 1. 3, § 8. "Liberti muneribus fungi debent apud originem patronorum ; sed si sua patrimonia habent sussectura oneribus: res enim patronorum muneribus libertinorum subjecta non est."

Code 10, t. 38, 1. 2. "Si, ut proponis, ea, quæ ex causa fideicommissi te manumisit, ab ea libertatem justam fuerit consecuta, quæ originem ex provincia Aquitania ducebat; tu quoque ejus con

11 Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 27, pr. "Ejus, qui manumisit, municeps est manumissus, non domicilium ejus, sed patriam secutus. Et si patronum habeat duarum civitatium municipem, per manumissionem earundem civitatium erit municeps."

12 Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 7. "Si quis a pluribus manumissus sit, omnium patronum originem sequitur."

18 See Savigny, op. cit. § 351, note n, and § 356.

14 Tom. ii. p. 737 B.

15

Op. cit. § 351.

rested somewhere in the civic body; but by whom it was to be exercised, in what manner, or on what conditions, we have not the grounds even for conjecture.

§ 4. Id. id. By whichever of these means citizenship arose, it could not be extinguished by the mere will of the person; but, as Savigny points out1 (except in the case of citizenship arising from adoption, which as we have seen ceased with emancipation) "dismission by the municipal authorities must have been as necessary as allection by them." A legal marriage, while it did not destroy the origo of the wife even if it were different from that of her husband, suspended during her marriage her liability to personal burdens connected with her native citizenship.2 And a similar immunity from personal burdens without the complete dissolution of his original citizenship applied in the cases of a citizen raised to the dignity of a senator, and his children,3 and a soldier during the period of his service.1

It is apparent, from what has already been said, that a person might at the same time possess citizenship in several urban communities, and so too it was possible that in several cases he might be without citizenship in any.5

1 Op. cit. § 351, note p.

2 Code 10, t. 62, 1. 1. "Eam, quæ aliunde oriunda, alibi nupta est; si non in urbe Roma maritus ejus consistat, non apud originem suam, sed apud incolatum mariti ad honores seu munera, quæ personis cohærent, quorumque is sexus capax esse potest, compelli posse, sæpe, rescriptum est. Patrimonii vero munera necesse est mulieres in his locis, in quibus possident, sustinere." See also Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 37, § 2, and 1. 38, § 3.

8 Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 23, pr. "Municeps esse desinit senatoriam adeptus dignitatem, quantum ad munera; quantum vero ad honorem, retinere creditur originem. Denique manumissi ab eo, ejus municipii efficiuntur municipes, unde originem trahit."

Id. 1. 22, §§ 4 and 5. "Senator ordine motus, ad originalem patriam, nisi hoc specialiter impetraverit, non restituitur. Senatores et eorum filii, filiæ que, quoque tempore nati, natæve,

itemque nepotes, pronepotes et proneptes ex filio, origini eximuntur, licet municipalem retineant dignitatem."

4 Dig. 50, t. 4, 1. 3, § 1. "His, qui castris operam per militiam dant, nullum municipale munus injungi potest; cæteri autem privati, quamvis militum cognati sunt, legibus patriæ suæ, et provinciæ obedire debent."

Id. 1. 4, § 3. "Qui obnoxius muneribus suæ civitatis fuit, nomen militiæ, defugiendi oneris municipalis gratia, dedit; deteriorem causam Reip. facere non potuit."

5 According to Savigny, op. cit. § 351, this might occur in several ways: (1) "When a foreigner was received as a resident into the Roman Empire without becoming by allection a citizen of any municipality;" (2) "When a citizen of any town was released from its municipal connection without being received into another community;" and (3) it took place among "the freedmen of

§ 5. Id. Domicilium. - The second bond or connection which the Roman law recognized between person and place was domicilium. It differed from origo in that it was of a less artificial character and generally depended solely upon the will of the person; so that, generally speaking, without the consent of the municipal authorities one might acquire and abandon domicil at pleasure, provided that his intention to do so was accompanied by the fact of transfer of bodily presence. It is not proposed here to enter into an inquiry concerning the Roman theory of domicil, inasmuch as it will be noticed incidentally in various parts of the body of this work. For the present the learned reader is referred to the principal texts contained in the Code and Digest, which are collected below in a note.1 It is sufficient to say that although it differs in some points from the modern theory, there is a general correspondence, and more particularly with the modern theory as held by the continental jurists, than whom the British and American authorities have taken a somewhat wider departure from the Roman theory in several particulars.

the lowest class, who were dedititiorum numero, and belonged to no community." Bar, however, disputes the correctness of these three categories, and argues that every free inhabitant of the Roman world must have either actively or passively belonged to some definite municipal territory. He considers it probable that the dedititii "did belong to some particular community as passive citizens, if not active." Bar, Int. Privat und Strafrecht, § 29, pp. 75-77 (Gillespie's trans. pp. 82, 83).

1 DEFINITIONS.

C. 10, t. 39, 1. 7. Cives quidem origo, manumissio, allectio, vel adoptio: incolas vero (sicut et Divus Hadrianus Edicto suo manifestissime declaravit) domicilium facit. Et in eodem loco singulos habere domicilium, non ambigitur, ubi quis larem, rerumque, ac fortunarum suarum summam constituit, unde rursus non sit discessurus, si nihil avocet: unde cum profectus est, peregrinari videtur : quod si rediit, peregrinari jam destitit.

Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 27, § 1. Si quis negotia sua non in colonia, sed in municipio semper agit, in illo vendit, emit, contrahit, eo in foro, balineo, spectaculis utitur; ibi festos dies celebrat : omnibus denique municipii commodis, nullis coloniarum, fruitur, ibi magis habere domicilium, quam ubi colendi causa diversatur.

Dig. 50, t. 16, 1. 203. Sed de ea re constitutum esse, eam domum unicuique nostrum debere existimari, ubi quisque sedes et tabulas haberet, suarumque rerum constitutionem fecisset.

Dig. 50, t. 16, 1. 239, § 2. Incola est, qui aliqua regione domicilium suum contulit: quem Græci rápolкov (id est, juxta habitantem) appellant. Nec tantum hi, qui in oppido morantur, incolæ sunt: sed etiam, qui alicujus oppidi finibus ita agrum habent, ut in eum se, quasi in aliquam sedem, recipiant.

GENERAL PRINCIPLES.

Dig. 50, t. 1, 1. 27, § 2. Celsus, lib. 1 Digestorum, tractat: si quis instruc

fore, a person might belong to an urban community. Enough