Dominus Navis

In the civil law. The owner of a vessel. Dig. 39. 4. 11. 2. DOMINUS NON MARITABIT PUPILLUM nisi semel. A lord cannot give a ward In marriage but once. Co. Litt. 9. DOMINUS REX NULLUM HABERE PC test parem, multo minus superlorem. The king cannot have an equal, much less a superior, 1 Reeve, Hist. Eng. Law, 115.

In Civil Law. The absolute owner of a ship. Wharton. DOMIT/E (Lat). Tame; subdued; not wild. Applied to domestic animals, in which a man may have an absolute property. 2 Bla. Com. 391. DONATARIUS (L. Lat). One to whom something is given. A donee. DONATIO (Lat). A gift. A transfer of the title to property to one who receives it without paying for it. Vicat. The act by which the owner of a thing voluntarily transfers the title and possession of it from himself to another person, without any consideration. See Indiana N. & S. R. W. Co. v. City of Attica, 56 Ind. 476; Georgia Penitentiary Co. No. 2 v. Nelms, 65 Ga. 499, 38 Am. Rep. 793. A donation is never perfected until it has been accepted; for an acceptance is requisite to make the donation complete. See Assent; Ayl. Pand. tit. 9; Clef des Lois Rom.; 2 Kent 438; Penfield v. Thayer, 2 E. D. Sm. (N. Y.) 305; Ivey's Adm'r v. Owens, 28 Ala. N. S. 641. In old English law and in the modern law, in several phrases, the word retains the extended sense it has in the civil law. Its literal translation, gift, has acquired in real property law a more limited meaning, being applied to the conveyance of estates tail. 2 Bla. Com. 316; Littleton § 59; West, Symb. § 254; 4 Cruise, Dig. 51. There are several kinds of donatio: as, donatio simplest et pura (simple and pure gift without compulsion or consideration); donatio aosoluta et larga (an absolute gift); donatio conditionalis (a conditional gift); donatio striata et coarctura (a restricted gift, as, an estate tail). DONATIO INTER VIVOS (Lat a gift between living persons). A contract which takes place by the mutual consent of the giver, who divests himself of the thing given in order to transmit the title of it to the donee, gratuitously, and the donee who accepts and acquires the legal title to it. See Gift; Donatio Mortis Causa. DONATIO MORTIS CAUSA (Lat a gift in prospect of death). A gift made by a person causes to be delivered, to another, the possession of any personal goods, to keep as his own in case of donor's decease. 2 Bla. Com. 514; Gouiiey v. Linsenblgler, 51 Pa. 345. The civil law defines it to be a gift under apprehension of death: as, when anything Is given upon condition that if the donor die the donee shall possess it absolutely, or return it if the donor should survive or sould repent of having made the gift, or If the donee should die before the donor. Adams v. Nicholas, 1 Miles (Pa.) 109. It differs from a legacy, inasmuch as It does not require proof in the court of probate; 2 Stra. 777; 6ee 1 Bligh, N. S. 531; and no assent is r< from the executor to perfect the donee's title; 2 Ves. 120; 1 S. & S. 245. It differs from a gift inter vivos because it is ambulatory and revocable during the donor's life because it may be made to the wife of the donor, and because it is liable for his debts, and it requires actual delivery; Poullain v. Poullain, 79 Ga. 11, 4 S. E. 81. This division of gifts is taken from the Roman law, as are also the rules by which they are governed. 2 Kent 439. See also as to these distinctions Brett, L. Cas. Mod. E<\. 33. The donor need not be in extremis; Larrabee v. HascaU, 88 Me. 511,:±4 Atl. 408, 51 Am. St. Rep. 440. It has been considered essential to the validity of the gift that the donor should die of the very malady from which deatli was apprehended at the time of making the gift; Williams v. Chamberlain, 165 111. 210, 4G N. E. 250; Conser v. Snowden, 54 Md. 175, 39 Am. Bep. 368; but the better opinion is that while it is not a requisite that he should die from the very disease or peril from which he apprehended death, yet there must be no intervening recovery, and it is essential that his death ensue as a result of some disease or peril existing or impending at the time the gift was made; Peck v. Scolield, 186 Mass. 108, 71 N. E. 109; Ridden v. Thrall. 125 N. Y. E N. E. 627, 11 L. R. A. 684, 21 Am. St. Rep. 758. A soldier ordered to the seat of war is not in such imminent peril as will justify his making a gift causa mortis; Linsenblgler v. Gourley, 56 Pa. 166, 94 Am. Dec. 51; but such gifts have been held valid where the donor never returned alive, hut fell hi battle or died in camp: Virgin v. Gaither, 42 111. 39; Gass v. Simpson, 4 Coldw. (Tenn.) 2SS. A gift made in contemplation of suicide is utterly void as agalnsl public policy; Duryea v. Harvey, 188 Mass. 429, 67 X. I A delivery of more than was Intended to be given cannot overrule the donor's Intention, and the donee can take only as much as was intended to he given; Crippen v. Adams, 132 Mich. 81, 92 N. w. 496. The delivery need not be made to the donee personally, but may he made to another as his agent or trustee, and that without his knowled the time of making the gift: Sheedy v. Roach, 124 Mass. 472, 26 Am. Rep. 680; Williams v. Guile. 117 N. V. 843, 22 N. B, 1071, 8 L. R. A. "'6t>. Where actual manual tradition cannot be made, either from their nature or their situation at the time, in such eases the delivery may be constructive, although in all tendant drcum md conditions wil' permit; Newman v. 8. B. hnieally. ery by the S. B. 721: An mon v. ' 191, 26 s. W. 826; but Blight practical lm] gift is beneficial to will be presumed; I >evol \ I V 24 N. B. 246, 7 L. K. A. nine, 71 N. II. 585, 53 Atl. 1026. To constitute a good donatio mortit first, the thing given mu erty; Wei. 3 Binn. (1 Wells v. Tucker, 3 Binn. (Pa.) 370; 2 Jen. 431; 3 Madd. 184: haul: i Michener v. Dale, 23 Pa. 59; 2 I <;ii': White b. (N. Y 3 P. Wms. 356; certiflcati k; Walsh v. Sexton, 55 Barb. (N. v.i 251; a; life insurance; 1 B. ft 8. 109; Gourley v. Linsenblgler, 51 Pa. 345; and a check offered for payment during the life of the donor; i Bro. C. C. 286; will be ered: but a check not bo presented, which had mInto the hands of a bona flde holder, is revoked by the death of the decedent; L. R. 6 Bq. 198; Burke v. B 27 I. a. Ann. 465, 21 Am. Rep.. v. Society, 31 Ohio St. 457, 27 A:. Matter of Smith ' D (N. I.) I v. Crowley, 59 Cal. 665; ulityr, as t" a given abroad; L. R. 5 Ch! Div. Taylor's Estate, 154 Ta. 1-::. 25 Atl. 1061,

In the civil law. The owner of a vessel. Dig. 39, 4, 11, 2. Dominus non maritabit pupillum nisi semel. Co, Litt. 9. A lord cannot give a ward in marriage but once. Dominus rex nullum habere potest parem, muito minus superiorem. ‘he king cannot have an equal, much less a superior. 1 Reeves, Eng. Law, 115. DOMIT#H. Lat. Tame; domesticated; not wild. Applied to domestic animals, in which 4 man may havean absolute property, 2 Bil. Comm. 391,