136 On the Roman ColonL lived the longest was to keep him, or, if there was no dif^ ference of time, the last^^ The first kind of prescription, by which a colonus obtained his freedom through his own act, was entirely abolisht by Justinian ; so that from his time forward there was no limit to the period after which the master of a colonus might lay claim to him^'. With regard to the second kind of prescription, by which a colonus came into the hands of another landowner, he did not lay down any rule ; nor did he incorporate the beforementioned regu- lations made by his predecessors^^. Hence it seems that in this case the general rule with regard to prescription in all actions must now have come into force^ so that a thirty-years possession would be secured against the claims of the prior master, without regard to those specific regulations. After going through these details we may now give the following general view of the condition of the coloni. They were attacht to the soil by their birth, not as day-labourers, but as farmers, who tilled a piece of land on their own account, and rendered produce or money for it : that they had also to perform any services on their landlord'^s estate is nowhere mentioned. They had no personal right in the land : but as the state from economical and financial reasons insisted on their continuing on their farms, and as their rent could not be raised, their condition was nearly as well secured as it would have been by personal rights. They could hold pro- perty, only they were precluded from disposing of it at will : some classes however were free even from this restric- tion. Generally speaking they paid a polltax : but even in cases where this was remitted, their condition as coloni still continued unchanged ^^ If we compare their condition with 96 L. un. C. Theod. de inquil. (v. 10). Nov. Valent. Tit. 9. 97 L. 23. pr. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47). 98 L. 23. pr. C. J. de agric. (xi. 47) speaks of a claim advanced against the colonus himself, and expressly forbids all prescription in such case : the second section speaks of claims urged against another proprietor, and in so doing says nothing about any sort of prescription. 99 Hence we see that among the coloni by way of exception there might be found instances of two totally different privileges, the right of disposing of property, and the exemption from the polltax. There was no sort of connexion between tliem, and (!ujacius, who jumbles them up together, is evidently mistaken. For in L. un. C. J.
