Dictionary of Greek and Roman antiquities. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

644 INTERDICTUM. INTERREX.
its origin was justa, became injusta, vitiosa, as lost the possessio, which was transferred to the
soon as restitution was refused. Restitution could plaintiff (petitor). (Rudorff, Ueber des Iaterdict
be claimed by the Interdictum de Precario, pre- Quem Fulndum, &c., Zeitschris?, vol. ix.)
cisely as in the case of Vis; and the sole founda. " By all these Interdicts Possession is protected,
tion of the right to this Interdict was a vitiosa and possession in itself, in its immediate form as
possessio, as just explained. The Precarium was power, in fact, over a thing. Possession thus obnever viewed as a matter of contract. The Inter- tains a legal existence, which is simply connected
dictumn de precario originally applied to land only, with that fact. This pure reception of possession
but it was subsequently extended to movable among Rights is not perplexed by the consideration
things. The obligation imposed by the Edict was of the rightful or wrongful origin of the possession,
to restore the thing, but not its value, in case it which origin has no effect with respect to the prowas lost, unless dolus or lata culpa could be proved tection given to possession. The Injusta Possessio,
against the defendant. But from the time that that is, the possession which has been acquired vi,
the demand is made against, the defendant, he is or clam or precario, is certainly not protected
ia msorwa, and, as in the case of the other Interdicts, against the person from whom it has been acquired
he is answerable for alil culpa, and for the fruits or by the possessor by any one of these three vitia
profits of the thing; and generally, he is bound to possessionis; but apart from this case, the Injusta
place the plaintiff in the condition in which he Possessio gives the same claim to protection as the
would have been, if there had been no refusal. Justa. (Dig. 43. tit. 17. s. 2.) The Interdicts
No exceptions were allowed in the case of a Pre- arise out of Possessio, and indifferently whether it
carium. is Justa or Injusta; only, if two possessors claim
The origin of the Precarium is referred by against one another, a former and a present posSavigny to the relation which subsisted between a sessor, of whom the one has obtained possession
patronus and his cliens, to whom the patronus gave from the other vitiose, the former is not protected
the use of a portion of the ager publicus. If the against the latter. (Dig. 43. tit. 17. s. I. ~ 9.)"
cliens refused to restore the land upon demand, the Pubchta, Instituttionen, &c., ii. ~ 225.
patronus was entitled to the Interdictum de pre- (For other matters relating to the Interdict see
cano. As the relation between the patronus and Gaius, iv. 138-170; Paulus, S. R. v. tit. 6; Dig.
the cliens was analogous to that between a parent 43; Savigny, Das R1echt des Besitzes, pp. 403and his child, it followed that there was no contract 516; Savigny and Haubold, Zeitscl rSif, vol. iii. pp.
between them, and the patron's right to demand the 305, 358, 421; Keller, Uevber die Deductio qzle
land back was a necessary consequence of the relation mnoribius fit and Des Interdictun Uti possidetis,
between him and his cliens. (Festus, s. v. Paties.) Zeitsclirsi, vol. xi.; Rundorff, Benzmerlc nyen iib)e
The precarium did not fall into disuse when the dasselbe Is2terdict, Zeitsclriffl, vol. xi.; Puchta, Inold ager publicus ceased to exist, and in this respect stitutio2en, &c., ii. ~~ 169, 225.) [G. L.]
it followed the doctrine of possesslo generally. iNTERPRES, an interpreter. This class of
[AGRARIAE LEGCE.] It was in fact extended persons became very numerous and necessary to
and applied to other things, and, among them, to the Rornmans as their empire extended. Embassies
the case of pledge. [PIGNUS.] from foreign nations to Rome, and from Rome to
Gaius (iv. 156) makes a third division of In- other states were generally accompanied by interterdicta into Simplicia and Duplicia. Simplicia preters to explain the objects of the embassy to
are those in which one person is the plaintiff the respective authorities. (Cic. de Divinat. ii.
(actor), and the other is the defendant (lezs): all 64, (de JFieib. v. 29; Plin. iH.N. xxv. 2; Gell.
Restitutoria and Exhibitoria Interdicta are of this xvii. 17. 2; Liv. xxvii. 43.) In large mercantile
kind. Prohibitoria Interdicta are either Simplicia towns the interpreters, who formed a kind of
or Duplicia: they are Simplicia in such cases as agents through whom business was done, were
those, when the praetor forbids any thing to be sometimes very numerous, and Pliny (H. N. vi.
done in a locus sacer, in a flumen publicum, or on 5) states that at Dioscurias in Colchis, there were
a ripe. They are Duplicia as in the case of the at one time no less than 130'persons who acted as
Interdictum uti Possidetis and Utrubi; and they interpreters to the Roman merchants, and through
are so called, says Gains, because each of the liti- whom all the business was carried on.
geant parties may be indifferently considered as All Roman praetors, proconsuls, and quaestors,
actor or reus, as appears from the terms of the who were entrusted with the administration of a
Interdict. (Gains, iv. 160.) province, had to carry on all their official proceedInterdicta seem to have been also called Duplicia ings in the Latin language (Val. Max. ii. 2. ~ 2),
in respect of their being applicable both to the ac- and as they could not be expected to be acquainted
quisition of a possession which had not been had with the language of the provincials, they had
before, and also to the recovery of a possession. always among their servants [APPARITORES] oIle
An Interdict of this class was granted in the case or more interpreters, who were generally Romans,
of a vindicatio, or action as to a piece of land but in most cases undoubtedly freedmen. (Cic. pro
against a possessor who did not de'end his pos- Btlb. 11,) These interpreters had not only to
session, as, for instance, when he did not submit officiate at the conventus [CoNVENTUS], but also
to a judicium and give the proper sponsiones or explained to the Roman governor everything which
satisdationos. A similar interdict was granted in the provincials might wish to be laid before him.
the case of a vindicatio of an hereditas and a (Cic. c. Yerr. iii. 37, ad Fanz. xiii. 44; Caes. Bell.
ususfructus. Proper security was always required Call. i. 19; compare Dirksen, Civil. Abhlandl. i. p.
from the person in possession, in the case of an in 1G, &c.) [L, S.]
rem actio, in order to secure the plaintiff against INTERREX, INTERREGNUM (called by
any loss or injury that the property Inight sustain the Greek writers ctEoeartiAseus, uteooeaoa L'Xeos
while it was in the possession of the defendant. apX77, se~na O s1ELa). The office of Interre is said
If the defendant refused to give such "ecurity he to have been instituted on the death of Romulus,