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