InthereignofKingPepin，thecustomsthenestablishedhadnotthesameforceasthelaws；butitwasnotlongbeforethelawsgavewaytothecustoms。Andasnewregulationsaregenerallyremediesthatimplyapresentevil，itmaywellbeimaginedthatasearlyasPepin’stime，theybegantopreferthecustomstotheestablishedlaws。
WhathasbeensaidsufficientlyexplainsthemannerinwhichtheRomanlawbegansoveryearlytobecometerritorial，asmaybeseenintheedictofPistes；andhowtheGothiclawcontinuedstillinforce，asappearsbythesynodofTroyesabove—mentioned。[66]TheRomanhadbecomethegeneralpersonallaw，andtheGothictheparticularpersonallaw；
consequentlytheRomanlawwasterritorial。Buthowcameit，somewillask，thatthepersonallawsoftheBarbariansfelleverywhereintodisuse，whiletheRomanlawwascontinuedasaterritorialinstitutionintheVisigothandBurgundianprovinces？IanswerthateventheRomanlawhadverynearlythesamefateastheotherpersonalinstitutions；
otherwisewewouldstillhavetheTheodosiancodeinthoseprovinceswheretheRomanlawwasterritorial，whereaswehavetheinstitutesofJustinian。ThoseprovincesretainedscarcelyanythingmorethanthenameofthecountryundertheRoman，orwrittenlaw，thanthenaturalaffectionwhichpeoplehavefortheirowninstitutions，especiallywhentheyconsiderthemasprivileges，andafewregulationsoftheRomanlawwhichwerenotyetforgotten。Thiswas，however，sufficienttoproducesuchaneffectthat，whenJustinian’scompilationappeared，itwasreceivedintheprovincesoftheGothicandBurgundiandemesneasawrittenlaw，whereasitwasadmittedonlyaswrittenreasonintheancientdemesneoftheFranks。
13。DifferencebetweentheSaliclaw，orthatoftheSalianFranks，andthatoftheRipuarianFranksandotherbarbarousNations。TheSaliclawdidnotallowofthecustomofnegativeproofs；thatis，ifapersonbroughtademandorchargeagainstanother，hewasobligedbytheSaliclawtoproveit，anditwasnotsufficientforthesecondtodenyit，whichisagreeabletothelawsofalmostallnations。