[3]
When the dispute turns on prescription, there
is no need to enquire into the facts of the case
itself. For example, a son puts forward a demurrer
against his father on the ground that his father has
forfeited his civil rights. The only point which has
to be decided is whether the demurrer can stand.
Still, wherever possible, we should attempt to create
a favourable impression in the judge as to the facts
of the case as well, since, if this be done, he will be
all the more disposed to give an indulgent hearing
[p. 135]
to our point of law: for example, in actions taking
the form of a wager and arising out of interdicts,1
even though the question is concerned solely with
actual possession, the question as to tile right to
possession not being raised, it will be desirable to
prove not merely that the property was actually in
our possession, but that it was ours to possess.
1 sponsio (= wager) was a form of suit in which the litigant promised to pay a sum of money if he lost his case. The interdict was an order issued by the praetor commanding or prohibiting certain action. It occurred chiefly in disputes about property.
Quintilian. With An English Translation. Harold Edgeworth Butler. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1922.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.