One form for the trial of a suit for land was, that the plaintiff required the defendant to give him a stipulation to pay a nominal sum in case the land should be found to belong to the plaintiff and to give surety for its transfer in that event. The question sent to the judge to be tried was whether the sum should be paid. If the plaintiff recovered and the defendant did not deliver the property, recourse was had on the sureties. Besides the set forms adapted to certain classes of actions the praetors formulated a great number, suited to special cases, generally styled actiones in factum. They also by interdict gave relief similar to that granted by injunction under our practice. The development of remedies was very similar to that in England. In the early times a few set forms of action afforded all the relief allowed; later these by fiction were allowed to cover cases not within the letter, and then new forms of procedure were devised to meet new conditions. Causes presenting novel questions and of especial difficulty were retained for trial and disposition by the praetor or taken cognizance of by a consul. The judices to whom the praetors referred causes were not officials, but citizens selected to hear and determine the particular cases. In the time of Diocletian the system of referring causes to judices fell into disfavor and was soon discontinued altogether; governors, prefects and praeters being required to hear the cause to the end, and the old procedure by which the plaintiff himself brought the defendant into court was abandoned.

The government of Rome, though in its essence a despotism, did not discard all the forms of a republic till the time of Diocletian. Though for centuries the obsequious senate had ratified the edicts of the emperors and given a formal sanction to his will, Diocletion ignored it altogether. He associated with himself the harsh and vigorous soldier Maximian, as joint ruler with the style Augustus, and later two other associates, as inferiors under the style Caesares; all subordinate to Diocletian as senior Augustus. He threw off all pretense of constitutional government and openly assumed autocratic powers, and to the title "imperator" added that of "dominus," and required those approaching him to make those

servile prostrations which were customary in the courts of the east. He infused vigor into the administration of the local government, but it was everywhere despotic vigor, emanating from the central authority. The government ceased to be administered from Rome as the seat of power; Nicomedia in the east and Milan in the west became the favorite residences respectively of Diocletian and Maximian. In his reign the government reached its climax of absolute power and rigidity, though the scheme of a quadruple division of power did not endure. While administrative changes occurred from time to time thereafter, the government remained despotic, unprogressive and moribund. The Roman republic was dead. The Roman empire ceased to be ruled either from Rome as a capital or by Romans, for Diocletian was the son of slave parents, and his mother was a Dalmatian. At the head of the civil administration were four prefects, under whom were the vicarii over the twelve dioceses, and governors of the 116 provinces with their hosts of minor officials, all under strict subordination and accountability to the central authority.

The reign of Constantine, beginning in 323, witnessed the establishment of the capitol of the eastern empire at Constantinople and the adoption of the Christian religion as the religion of the empire, but the theory of government remained unchanged. For the beneficial effects of Christianity we have to look elsewhere than to the governmental machinery. Though writings embodying the principles of the law multiplied, not only in the form of enactments by the comitia and senate and later in rescripts and edicts of the praetors and emperors, but also in extended commentaries by juris consults, it was not till the reign of Diocletian that the first efforts at codification were made. The Gregorian Code was a collection of imperial rescripts made near the end of the third century, to which Hermogenianus added a supplement about 365. These codes received the sanction of Theodosius and Valentinian. Under Theodosius a compilation was made and published A.D. 438 in sixteen books, covering the whole field of the law. Other less noted compilations among which may be mentioned one by order of Theodoric king of the

Ostrogoths, called the Edictum Theodoric, and another by order of Alaric II king of the Visigoths, styled Lex Romana Visigothorum.

The work however which stands as the product of all legal development under the empire is that accomplished by Trbonian and his associates. As we have seen, during the years of development the law gained written expression from time to time in edicts, rescripts and opinions of the juris consults. These in the time of Justinian had become so numerous as to fill nearly two thousand volumes. Justinian was not merely a compiler, but himself made various reforms in the body of the law. The first compilation made under his order was called the code, including the statute law and rescripts of the Gregorian and Hermogenian codes. This was followed by his fifty decisions, the Institutes, the Digest of writings of the jurists, a revised code and a series of Novels. Taken together they purport to cover the whole field of the law, civil, criminal, public, private, secular and ecclesiastical. The most that can be attempted here in reviewing this great work is a very general outline of its scope and leading provisions. This is rendered most difficult by the want of systematic and orderly arrangement, which alone saves modern publications from chaotic worthlessness.

Of the compilations of Justinian the Institutes were designed as a textbook for the schools, but the Digest and second or revised code were declared of equal authority. A condensed summary of the Institutes will be found in the Appendix. It is noticeable that the compiler and final authoritative promulgator of this vast product of Roman jurists, should have been a barbarian, born in Illyricum, ruling in Constantinople after the final extinction of the western empire and the overthrow of Rome as a center of political power. The vast accumulation of legal lore filling so many volumes was reduced to reasonable limits, freed from many uncertainties, improved in many particulars and promulgated as of controlling authority in all courts in the empire. It is even more remarkable that the perfection of this great body of law should have been effected after the disintegration of the empire was

well advanced, and at a time when letters were neglected and the authority of courts was being broken by the inroads of the barbarians and the disruption of the Roman system throughout the empire. Having reached its culmination the Roman law ceased to develop or have uniform operation, but gave way to the customs and laws of the barbarians wherever they supplanted Roman civilization. It was still resorted to in those parts of the empire which escaped the inroads of the barbarians, and as learning revived regained its force with modifications resulting from changed customs and conditions. Justinian, like many another lawgiver, aimed at completeness and finality in his work, and forbade the use of any other books or authorities, or any comments or interpretations of his works. He like others was oblivious to the truth that an absolutely fixed and rigid system of government or of laws is impossible. Anything like a clear comprehension of a system of laws necessitates an understanding of the material and social conditions to which it is applied. If we had no extrinsic evidence, the laws themselves exhibit the importance of the Roman theory of the family and of the institution of slavery. From the earliest days of Rome slavery had been a recognized institution, and it held its place until the empire broke into fragments. In the early days the number of slaves was relatively inconsiderable, but as new territories were added and the rich citizens enlarged their estates, they increased the numbers of their slaves, till in the time of the Caesars the nobles owned them by hundreds and even by thousands. With this great increase in slave holding came a corresponding decrease of the prosperity of the poorer class of citizens, who throughout the agricultural districts gradually ceased to be independent landowners and became tenants of the wealthy proprietors. In course of time this tenancy became on harder and harder terms, till the coloni, as they were termed, became virtually serfs attached to the soil, bound to cultivate the land on terms affording but a bare subsistence. Agricultural slaves were to a great extent assigned to the cultivation of particular tracts of land, which they were permitted to occupy with their families, and thus the actual conditions under which

the coloni and the slaves lived were often very similar. In the days of greater activity slaves were employed by their masters, not only on all kinds of works, but in all trades and callings, and opportunities for the acquisition of property and of freedom were afforded to some. The proud Roman patrician despised all useful labor and entrusted every employment to his slaves. Under the republic their numbers were sufficient to make servile revolts serious, and the insurrection under the leadership of Spartacus was only subdued after a desperate and bloody war. The emperors aimed at the establishment of social order and the protection of property rights. The moral claims of the slave to liberty and the pursuit of happiness were wholly obscured by the master's right to property." The great province of law and government was first to firmly establish the power of the emperor and those acting under him, and next to maintain the rights of property, that is the dominion of the master over his slaves and his lands. The ancient Roman idea of a single head of the family with full sway over all his children under the power and their families, accorded well with the spirit of a slave holding community. We have seen how largely slavery entered into the legal system of Justinian, and how fully it was recognized, though declared to be contrary to natural justice. With the reign of Justinian the empire in the west witnessed its last vigorous assertion of supremacy in Italy, though it nominally maintained a semblance of authority in central Italy till 755. The perfected despotism had become crystalized under Diocletian, leaving no chance for development or betterment from the wisdom of the multitude. The lawyers and lawmakers continued to change, amend and improve the laws till the time of Justinian, when they were compiled by his direction, and though greatly improved and rendered far easier of access than when scattered through so many volumes, they rapidly passed out of view and became unsuited to the changed conditions. The social decay resulting from an organization of society under which the great multitude were slaves, without education, opportunity for observation except of their immediate surroundings, or hope of better conditions, with an