Please Proofread! Thank you in advance!

Note that the law is not derived from the rule, but it is out of the law, which has been previously adopted, that the rule is formed. Thus, the rules of the Grammars are set up based on the use of the approving authors and writers, but the use is not defined by the precepts. The rule does indeed expound the law, which has previously been adopted, followed in particular cases and is of a more general and universal nature, in the shorter and simpler way possible. Someone objects that the Rule of Cato is establishing a new law. What the rule of Cato regulates is that the legacies, which are void from the beginning will not be validated with the lapse of time, even if the cause of the obstruction is removed. Respond to this objection that the rule in cases, which have been heretofore determined by the law, does not establish a new law, but concisely expounds what has been previously formulated. In cases that have not been hitherto determined the rule creates the law. Hence accept what is prescribed/objected by the Rule of Cato.