Responsa for Kiddushin 46:1
לר' שמעון בן אלעזר עבד כנעני מהו שיעשה שליח לקבל גיטו מיד רבו כיון דגמר לה לה מאשה כאשה
According to R'Simeon B'Eleazar,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who maintains that a slave cannot receive his own deed.');"><sup>1</sup></span> can a heathen slave appoint an agent to receive his deed of emancipation from his master:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosaf. gives two interpretations: (i) Obviously, as stated above, another person must accept it on his behalf. This, however, may be only if the slave does not explicitly appoint him his agent, but if he does, he becomes legally as himself, and just as he himself cannot accept the deed, his agent cannot either. (ii) When another person accepts it on his behalf, must he be his agent, just as the person who accepts a woman's divorce on her behalf must be distinctly appointed by her for that purpose? If so, on the view that it is to the slave's advantage to be freed, the agency is tacitly assumed: while if we hold that it is to his disadvantage, he must be expressly appointed. Or possibly, he does not act in the character of an agent at all, since the slave himself could not have accepted it. In that case, not only is an express appointment unnecessary, but even if the slave actually protests against it, his protest is unavailing.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. Although no present can be given to a married woman on condition that her husband have no right thereto, such a present may be given to her during the period of betrothal and thereupon the husband will have no right to such present or the income thereof. Therefore, the present and the accrued income must be returned to L. This decision is effective only if L's dislike of A is deep and genuine and is not induced by anyone. The community must pronounce the ban (herem) against anyone holding information relative to this matter; and if it be discovered that someone has induced L to rebel against A, then the money may be withheld from her as a punishment until she repents. The court always has a right to punish one even unduly, if such punishment will help to check lawlessness and indecency. In this case the punishment of L will serve as a warning to other women. Moreover, should A desire to marry another woman, I believe that he should be permitted to throw a bill of divorcement to L even against her will, since she is the rebellious party. A, however, is not entitled to the dowry promised to him by L's father, since the latter had expressed his intention of giving such dowry only in the event that L and A lived happily together.
SOURCES: Am II, 48.