Quaestio inexplicabilis

Dicat mihi aliquis et erit mihi magnus Apollo, quare sartor meus, quem nuper abdicavi, aut dismissus famulus, non possit adversus me possessorium summarissimum instituere, ut porro retineam? Quid si medicus ita agat: Ich befinde mich seit 1. 2. 3. und mehrern Jahren in ruhigem Besitze, daß Beklagter, so oft er krank geworden, mich rufen und sich von mir heilen lassen: Nachdem er aber mich neulich in diesem Besitze dadurch gekränket, daß er einen andern Arzt angenommen, so bitte so lange, bis Beklagter in Possessorio Ordinario oder Petitorio ein anders ausgeführet, mich zu schützen und demselben bey 20. Thlr. Strafe alle fernere Beeinträchtigungen zu untersagen. Sentio actionem non tenere, sed sentio tantum, nec si vel mortem mineris, possum dicere quare? Tu, si sapis, rationem decidendi suggere …

An unsolvable question

Could someone tell me – and I would call him my great Apollo for it – why my tailor, with whom I recently parted ways, or a servant I dismissed cannot bring summary possessory proceedings against me in order that I continue to employ him? What if a physician brought a complaint as follows: “I have been in quiet possession for one, two, three and more years, of the fact that whenever Defendant fell ill, he would call me and let himself be cured by me. Since now he has recently disturbed me in this possession by retaining another physician, I pray to protect me as long as Defendant has not shown cause in ordinary possessory2 or petitory proceedings and to enjoin him under a penalty of 20 thalers from any further disturbance”. I feel that the action does not lie, but I only feel it and even if you threaten me with death, I cannot tell you why. You, if you know one, suggest a reason for this decision …