The social and political effects of such a dangerous liberty as the right of arbitrary testamentary disposition depend upon its use, and its use depends on the character of the people. The Roman character was, at all periods of history, devoted to the hereditary theory. It is one that was so strongly believed in that it asserted itself in spheres where it was never contemplated—during the later Republic in succession to office, in the early Empire in the succession to the Principate—and as applied to property it was an essential condition of the permanence of the Roman family. For the maintenance of a house a rigid system of intestate inheritance is bad; it may not produce great wealth, but it often produces great poverty. The only satisfactory system is a minute examination of each particular case by the state or by individuals. Such a control by the state was utterly alien to the _laisser faire_ principles of the Roman, and history shows that the Decemvirs were right when they entrusted this discretionary power wholly to the _pater_. His functions as trustee were but extended to a period beyond his lifetime, and freedom of bequest was used as a means of equitable adjustment of property to the circumstances of the members of the family. The son who had made a rich marriage need not receive so much; the one destined to carry on the family traditions of office might receive more than the others. To him the _heredium_ might be given, while the younger sons were drafted into colonies. We do not know the principles; but that the principles tended to the preservation of the family is proved by the long traditions of the noble Roman houses. A legal view of the Roman family would be incomplete without consideration of the rights or infringement of rights dependent on it.