XXIV.

DE SINGULIS REBUS PER FIDEICOMMISSUM RELICTIS.

Potest autem quis etiam singulas res per fideicommissum relinquere, veluti fundum hominem vestem argentum pecuniam numeratam, et vel ipsum heredem rogare, ut alicui restituat, vel legatarium, quamvis a legatario legari non 1 possit. Potest autem non solum proprias testator res per fideicommissum relinquere, sed et heredis aut legatarii aut fideicommissarii aut cuiuslibet alterius. itaque et legatarius et fideicommissarius non solum de ea re rogari potest, ut eam alicui restituat, quae ei relicta sit, sed etiam de alia, sive ipsius sive aliena sit. hoc solum observandum est, ne plus quisquam rogetur alicui restituere, quam ipse ex testamento ceperit: nam quod amplius est, inutiliter relinquitur. cum autem aliena res per fideicommissum relinquitur, necesse est ei qui rogatus est aut ipsam redimere et praestare aut

oral fideicommissum stricto sensu: it could be appealed to when there had been any kind of communication made by the testator to the heir or other person, whether by writing or word of mouth and by the words 'et neque ex scriptura . . . . intervenerit' Justinian seems to have meant that his regulation was to apply whenever there was neither a formal will nor codicil, nor an oral declaration before five witnesses: the heir had to swear ὡς οὐ κατελείφθη φιδεικόμμισσον Theoph. For calumnia in the sense of groundless or vexatious litigation see Bk. iv. 16. 1 inf.

Tit. XXIV. As has been observed above, a fideicommissum could be charged on anyone who took a benefit by the decease: i.e. on heirs, testamentary or intestate, legatees, fideicommissarii, donees mortis causa (Dig. 32. 3; 31. 77. 1), the fiscus, if the estate came to it as bona vacantia (Dig. 30. 114. 2), the heirs of all these persons (Dig. 32. 5. 1: ib. 6. pr.), and the father of a filiusfamilias, or master of a slave, who was instituted or to whom a legacy or fideicommissum was given.

§ 1. Cf. Ulpian, reg. 25. 5 'per fideicommissum relinqui possunt, quae per damnationem legari.' The rule 'ne plus quisquam rogetur alicui restituere quam ipse ex testamento ceperit,' and the inference from it that a beneficiary may be charged with fideicommissa to the same extent to which he is benefited, each admit of an exception: (1) 'si pecunia accepta rogatus sit rem propriam, quamquam maioris pretii est, restituere, non est audiendus legatarius, legato percepto si velit computare' Dig. 31. 70. 1: cf. the same principle applied to the manumission of the legatee's or fideicommissarius' slave in Dig. 40. 5. 24. 12. Similarly if liberty was be

2

aestimationem eius solvere. Libertas quoque servo per fideicommissum dari potest, ut heres eum rogetur manumittere vel legatarius vel fideicommissarius. nec interest, utrum de suo proprio servo testator roget, an de eo qui ipsius heredis aut legatarii vel etiam extranei sit. itaque alienus servus redimi et manumitti debet: quod si dominus eum non vendat, si modo nihil ex iudicio eius qui reliquit libertatem percepit, non statim extinguitur fideicommissaria libertas, sed differtur, quia possit tempore procedente, ubicumque occasio redimendi servi fuerit, praestari libertas. qui autem ex causa fideicommissi manumittitur, non testatoris fit libertus, etiamsi testatoris servus sit, sed eius qui manumittit: at is, qui directo testamento liber esse iubetur, ipsius testatoris fit libertus, qui etiam orcinus appellatur. nec alius ullus directo ex testamento libertatem habere potest, quam qui utroque tempore testatoris fuerit, et quo faceret testamentum et quo moreretur. directo autem libertas tunc dari videtur, cum non ab alio servum manumitti rogat, sed velut ex suo testamento libertatem ei competere vult. Verba autem 3 fideicommissorum haec maxime in usu habeantur: peto, rogo, volo, mando, fidei tuae committo. quae perinde singula firma sunt, atque si omnia in unum congesta essent.

XXV.

DE CODICILLIS.

Ante Augusti tempora constat ius codicillorum non fuisse, sed primus Lucius Lentulus, ex cuius persona etiam fideicommissa coeperunt, codicillos introduxit. nam cum decederet in Africa, scripsit codicillos testamento confirmatos,

queathed to a servus alienus the master could not refuse to sell him if he had taken any benefit by the testator's decease, Cod. 6. 50. 13, Dig. 40. 5. 19. I. (2) No fideicommissum could be validly imposed on the 'legitima pars' Cod. 3. 28. 32; ib. 36. pr. and 1.

§ 2. See preceding note. In Gaius' time the refusal of the master to sell a slave to whom a testator had bequeathed freedom by a fideicommissum had been fatal to the disposition: 'si dominus eum non vendat, sane extinguitur libertas, quia pro libertate pretii computatio nulla intervenit' ii. 265.

Tit. XXV. When first recognised as binding under Augustus, codicilli

quibus ab Augusto petiit per fideicommissum, ut faceret aliquid et cum divus Augustus voluntatem eius implesset, deinceps reliqui auctoritatem eius secuti fideicommissa praestabant et filia Lentuli legata, quae iure non debebat, solvit, dicitur Augustus convocasse prudentes, inter quos Trebatium quoque, cuius tunc auctoritas maxima erat, et quaesisse, an possit hoc recipi nec absonans a iuris ratione codicillorum usus esset: et Trebatium sua sisse Augusto, quod diceret utilissimum et necessarium hoc civibus esse propter magnas et longas peregrinationes, quae apud veteres fuissent, ubi, si quis testamentum facere non posset, tamen codicillos posset. post quae tempora cum et Labeo codicillos fecisset, iam nemini dubium erat, quin codicilli iure optimo admitte

rentur.

1 Non tantum autem testamento facto potest quis codicillos facere, sed et intestatus quis decedens fideicommittere codicillis potest. sed cum ante testamentum factum codicilli facti erant, Papinianus ait non aliter vires habere, quam si speciali postea voluntate confirmentur. sed divi Severus et Antoninus rescripserunt ex his codicillis qui testamentum praecedunt posse fideicommissum peti, si appareat eum, qui postea testamentum fecerat, a voluntate quam codicillis ex

were informal documents in the nature of notes or memoranda containing directions from the deceased to his heir, and employed principally for the creation of fideicommissa-ἐλλιποῦς ἐν διαθήκῃ γνώμης ἀναπλήρωσις Theoph. Traces of this original formlessness even remain in the Digest, e.g. 29. 7. 6. 1; 31. 89. pr: cf. Cod. 6. 42. 22. As soon, however, as they acquired legal force, it became possible to do by codicilli much which hitherto had required a testament: the result being, as Mr. Poste remarks, the practical abolition of what had till then been an unbending rule of testamentary law, viz. the requirement of unity in the act of testation. Before this, no disposition of property to take effect after one's death, apart from donationes mortis causa, had been valid unless the whole of it were made uno contextu, uno eodemque tempore: but a man 'might now distribute his fortune in a series of fragmentary or piecemeal and unrelated dispositions.' It is in this that the legal advance marked by the recognition of codicilli consists, not in their freedom from form, which was corrected by later enactments.

§ 1. Intestate codicilli 'nihil desiderant, sed vicem testamenti exhibent' Dig. 29. 7. 16. Those which accompany a will are merely accessory to the latter, with which they stand or fall ('codicilli.... testamento

presserat non recessisse. Codicillis autem hereditas neque 2 dari neque adimi potest, ne confundatur ius testamentorum et codicillorum, et ideo nec exheredatio scribi. directo autem hereditas codicillis neque dari neque adimi potest: nam per fideicommissum hereditas codicillis iure relinquitur. nec condicionem heredi instituto codicillis adicere neque substituere

facto ius sequuntur eius' Dig. loc. cit., 'si ex testamento hereditas adita non fuisset, fideicommissum ex huiusmodi codicillis nullius momenti erit' ib. 3. 2), and as a general rule are read as part of the will itself: 'codicillorum ius singulare est, ut, quaecunque in his scribentur, perinde haberentur ac si in testamento scripta essent' Dig. ib. 2. 2. Occasionally, however, the codicilli are looked at by themselves, and apart from the will; e.g. if the testator is insolvent, or less than twenty years of age, at the time of executing his will, and then subsequently, when solvent or over that age, manumit a slave by codicilli, the manumission holds good, though it would have been invalid if made in the will, Dig. 29. 7. 4, ib. I.

There were at one time important differences in effect among codicils according as they were or were not confirmed, antecedently or subsequently, by a will. By unconfirmed codicils fideicommissa alone could be created: by codicilli confirmati the testator could give legacies (Gaius 2. 270, Ulpian, reg. 25. 8), appoint testamentary guardians, Dig. 26. 2. 3. pr., and directly manumit his own slaves: but under Justinian little remained of these distinctions except that relating to tutoris datio.

It was usual for wills to contain a 'clausula codicillaris,' by which the testator declared his desire, that if the will should prove invalid on any ground it should have force as codicilli. Such declaration might be in any form, and need not even mention the word codicils: 'ex his verbis, quae paterfamilias scripturae addidit: ταύτην τὴν διαθήκην βούλομαι εἶναι κυρίαν ἐπὶ πάσης ἐξουσίας, videri eum voluisse omnimodo valere ea quae reliquit, etiamsi intestatus decessisset' Dig. 29. 7. 29. I. By this clause the dispositions of the will were validated only so far as they would have held good had they been originally executed as codicilli: thus they fell to the ground unless the forms required for the execution of codicils (3 inf.) were observed, or if the testator had not testamenti factio: 'sciendum est eos demum fideicommissum posse relinquere, qui testandi ius habent' Dig. 30. 2. Subject to this, the effect of the clausula was to convert the institution of the will into a fideicommissaria hereditas, Dig. 31. 88. 17, binding on the intestate heirs, or those instituted in an earlier or later testament. If, however, the ground of the will's invalidity was vio. lation of the rules relating to the legitima pars, the institution became altogether void. The legacies and fideicommissa remained good in any

case.

§ 2. Nothing can be done by codicils affecting the direct universal succession. To what is said in the text it may be added, that no invalid institution could be validated by a codicillary confirmation, however

3 directo potest. Codicillos autem etiam plures quis facere potest: et nullam sollemnitatem ordinationis desiderant.

express, Dig. 29. 7. 2. 4; though such confirmation, and also pupillary substitutions made by codicils, would be upheld by a 'benignior interpretatio' as fideicommissa, Dig. loc. cit.; 36. 1. 76. So too the heir's name, which the testator had omitted or suppressed in a will, might be supplied in later codicilli, Dig. 28. 5. 77: and in the same way a testator might declare the institutus of an earlier will indignus, whereby his portion was forfeited to the fiscus, Cod. 6. 35. 4. Soldiers were exempted from the

restrictions of this section, Dig. 29. 1. 36. pr.

§ 3. The statement of the text that codicilli were subject to no requirements of form is misleading: all that it means is that they could be expressed in any phrase or language. Constantine prescribed for intestate, and Theodosius II for all codicils the same number and qualification of witnesses as were necessary for a testament. Under Justinian they had to be signed by the maker before at least five witnesses, Cod. 6. 23. 28. 1, and to be signed and sealed by the latter in his presence: many writers, however, hold that sealing was unnecessary. If these formalities were not complied with, the procedure described in Tit. 23. 12 supr. might still be appealed to, so far as the would-be codicils could be construed as creating a fideicommissum.