Christo auspice: Impetrato consensu amplissimi ordinis facultatis Iuridicae, in inclyta Academia Basiliensi, pro solenni gradu in utroque Iure consequendo, has propositas assertiones de Testibus defendet Caspar Niess Tremonianus

the redness, and the trembling cause less faith to be attributed to someone.

12. It should not be ignored that the laws have removed the ability to give testimony to all in their own case. We say this is true not only when the business pertains to us by our own or common right, but also by consequence. Hence, a seller does not give testimony for a buyer, even if he is not held for eviction, nor does a broker for one of the contracting parties, a donor for the donee, or a surety for the debtor. However, a legatee, a beneficiary of a trust, and a guardian are correctly used as witnesses in a will.

13. We say that this also obtains in a mere and simple verbal declaration original: "nuncupatione", unaided by any writing or public faith, and even in codicils and other less solemn last wills, however many may complain. A vassal is also prohibited from being a witness in his lord's case.

14. Whether a citizen can give testimony in a case of the city and republic, or a colleague in a case of the college, is neatly questioned here. We conclude that they can, under a distinction which we leave to be shaken out and clarified by arguments.

15. Furthermore, those connected by blood from the side are excused from giving testimony by the Julian and Papian laws. Thus, neither kinsmen nor relatives original: "cognati et agnati" should be regularly compelled to testify for or against kinsmen or relatives up to the seventh degree. Likewise, no one shall be compelled to give testimony against a father-in-law, son-in-law (even if only the betrothal has been celebrated), stepfather, stepson, husband, or wife, just as many others are excused, such as those older than 70 years, soldiers, and honest matrons, so that they do not irreverently fall into the disgrace of matronly shame under the pretext of a lawsuit. Therefore, when such privileged persons are summoned, an excuse will be necessary for them. For they are admitted if they are willing, even within the third degree, especially in a civil case. In which it is also to be observed that as often as they are received, it is necessary to record in the acts that they were examined willingly, so that impugnment may be avoided.

16. From these things, this question for the doctors has taken its origin: Can a brother give testimony in the case of a brother? We decree that he can, although there are those who pose the contrary. We also say that those interpreters are wrong who think that a brother is prohibited from being a witness in a brother's will, or a husband in his wife's, or a patron in his freedman's. Indeed, we do not deny that even an emancipated son can be a witness in his father's will.

17. Nor do we think it should be omitted here, if besides these aforementioned witnesses,