
 
        
         
		thofe  a  complete  feizin  is  altogether  impraflicable,  and  hence  an  incomplete  
 feizin mnft  neceflarily  fuffice,  fince  this  is  all  that  the  article  
 ' admits  of-;-— and  alio,  becaufe  in this  inftance  the donor does  not  in*  
 cur  the  inconvenience  of a  divifion; 
 O b j e c t i o n .— Analogy would  fuggeft  that .the  gift  of a  part of ati  
 indivifible  article  is  invalid;  'becaufe,  although  the  donor  do not,  in  
 fuch  a  cafe,  incur  the  inconvenience  of  a  divifion,  lti-11  he  incurs  a  
 participation  in  the  property;  and  this  allb  is  a  fort  o f  inconvenience. 
 R e p l y .— The  donor  is  fubjefled  to  a  participation  in  a  thing  
 which  is  not  the  fubjefl  of  his  grant,  namely,  the  ufe  [of the whole  
 indivifible article,]  for  his „gift  related  to  the  fubjlance  o f  the  article,  
 -not  to  the  ufe of it :— hence the  neceflity  of a participation  is  not  incurred  
 by him with  refpe& to the thing which is,  properly,  the fubjed  
 of his  grant. 
 — With  refpefl to the  analogy advanced by Shafe'i between the  cafe in  
 queftioti  and  that of /farz-loan,  or  bequeft,  it  is  totally unfounded;  
 becaufe in  bequefts the  feizin  [of the legatee]  is not a neoefiary  condition  
 ;  neither  is  it  fo  in  a  valid  fale;— and  although  feizin be  requilite  
 in  Sillim  and  S ir f  fales,  ftill  it  is  not  ordained  with  refpeft to  them,  
 and  hence is  not  required  to  be complete  in  thofe  inftances.  Befides,  
 as all  thofe contrails  [of  fale]  are  contrails  of refponfibility,  the obligation  
 of a  divifion  is  agreeable  to  them.— With  refpedt  to  a  Kar%-  
 loan,  it  is a voluntary  contrail  in  the beginning,  but  a  contrail  of refponfibility  
 in  the-end  (fince  it  involves  refponfibility  for  a Jimilar',)  
 and  hence,  in  confideration  of  its  refemblance  to  both,  an incomplete  
 feizin  is  made  a  condition  in it,  not  a  divifion:  befides,  feizin  is  not  
 efpecially ordained in this  inftance. 
 If  a perfon make a gift, to his partner,  of his fhare in  the partner-  
 fhip-ftock,  capable  of  divifion,  it is invalid,  becaufe of the invalidity  
 of the gift  of  an  undefined  part  of  a  divifible  fubjefl,  as  before explained. 
 I f 
 If' a perfon make  a  gift,  to  another,  of  an  undefined  portion  of  
 land,  (fuch  as  an half,  or a fourth f   fuch  gift is  null,  for the reafons  
 already fet  forth.—If, howeyer,  he  afterwards divide it off,  and make  
 delivery of it,,  the gift  becomes valid;  becaufe ,a  gift is rendered complete  
 by  feizin;  and in  this  cafe nothing elfe remains indefinitely involved  
 with  the gift at  the time of feizin.. 
 If  a perfon.  make  a  gift of  the  flour  of wheat,  which is yet in  Agiftofan  
 <irain,  or of oil of-Seffamé which  is  not  yet  exprefled  from, the  feeds,  
 fuch  gift is invalid ;  and if  he afterwards  grind  the  wheat  into flour,  pther article  
 e r   extract  the  pil  from the Seffamé  feeds,  and  fo deliver them to  the  valid.  m  
 donee,  ftill  the  gift  is  not  thereby rendered  valid.—The  fame  rule  
 alfo holds with  rèfpedl to butter which  is  yet  in  milk-—The  reafbn  
 ©f  this  is  that  the  thing  given,  in  all  thefe  cafes,  is  a  nonentity; 
 (whence it .is  that if an ufurper  of wheat,  or of  feeds,  Ihould either  
 grind the one into  flour,  or prefs the other into oil,  he then  becomes  
 proprietor of  them;);  and  as  a  nonentity cannot  be a fubjeft  of property, 
   the deeds  in queftion  are  therefore null,  and cannot afterwards  
 be rendered valid otherwife than by being executed de novo.— It is  different  
 in the preceding café, becaufe an undefined portion of any thing  
 is neverthelefs capable of 'being transferred. 
 T he gift of milk in the udder,  of wool upon the back  of  a  goat,,  
 of grain  or  trees  upon  the  ground,  or of fruit  upon  trees,  is in the  
 nature of the  gift of an undefined, part of a thing,  becaufe in thefe infiances  
 the caufe of invalidity is the conjunction of the thing given with  
 what is  not  given,  which is  a  bar to the  feizin,  in  the fame  manner,  
 as in the cafe of undivided, things.. 
 If  the thing  given  be in the hands,  of  the donee,,  in  virtue,  of  a  g;ft of a  
 truft,  the  gift  is  in  that  cafe complete,  although there be no formal  ,dePoiit.to the  
 teizin,  Imce the  actual article is already m the donee’s  hands,  whence  lid without a  
 hiss feizin is  not  requifite.  It is otherwife  where a depofitor fells,  the  ver^'lLfd'1' 
 4  -  depofit