This page needs to be proofread.
444
APPENDIX.
position: both became the property of the receiver, but with an obligation of return; if the one was properly called nexum aes, why should not the other be res nexa? The final, and unfortunately corrupt, sentence in the passage of Varro refers to the case of the debtor who, in the earlier law, made himself nexus, and has little or no connection with what precedes it. (See on this subject the observations of Prof. Nettleship in the Journal of Philology, vol. xii. (1883), p. 198 sq.)
NOTE D. (See § 34, note 12.)
In the early
