« PreviousContinue »
quarto cognatis proximis : quinto tum quam ex familia : sexto patrono et patronae liberisque eorum et parentibus:
as heir (§ 2 supr. : cf. note on Bk. ii. 10. 2 supr.); i.e. he allowed him to sue and be sued by the actions, as utiles, which lay at the suit of and against the heres, as directae : Ulpian, reg. 28. 12. : cf. Gaius iv. 34. ... is qui ex edicto bonorum possessionem petiit, ficto se herede agit.' After the establishment of the Empire, and before Hadrian, he was, like the heres, enabled to sue for the universitas by a 'possessoria hereditatis petitio' Dig. 5. 5. For another view of the relation between the interdict and hereditatis petitio see on Bk. iv. 15. 3 inf.
A noticeable point of difference between bonorum possessio and hereditas is that the former was never acquired ipso iure, as the latter was by necessarii or sui et necessarii heredes. It was obtained originally by application to the praetor (agnitio or petitio bonorum possessionis), which could be made by an agent, while no one could accept an inheritance except the person to whom it was delata, note on Bk. ii. 19. 7 supr. This application was usually granted without precise inquiry into the applicant's title, which, if investigated at all, was investigated later, and only because it was disputed by some one who alleged that his own right was a better one. In this case the latter would be granted a second and formal bonorum possessio‘litis ordinandae gratia. The sons of Constantine enacted that bonorum possessio might be obtained from any judge or magistrate by a mere signification of acceptance, Cod. 6. 9. 8 and 9, though this was still called agnitio or petitio ; and this is the rule referred to by Justinian in $ 12 inf. as holding in his day.
The right to take the possession could be lost by either express repudiation ( 10 int.) or lapse of the time (specified in $ 9; Ulpian, reg. 28. 10) within which it was required by law to be exercised. A person barred by such lapse was excluded only from one rank or class : if he was admitted by the edict in a lower rank also, he had another opportunity (sibi ipse succedere 'Dig. 38. 9. 1. 10 and 11). Occasionally, however, the praetor would not grant bonorum possessio without an examination into the circumstances of the particular case. For instance, the edictum Carbonianum provided, that if the parentage of an impubes, upon which his rights of succession depended, was disputed, the magistrate should hold a summary inquiry, and if in this his alleged parentage was not clearly disproved, bonorum possessio should be granted provisionally to him upon security being given against waste, until the question at issue was definitely settled, such settlement often being postponed until the child attained puberty. In cases of this sort, if bonorum possessio was eventually granted after the magisterial examination, it was called bonorum possessio decretalis in contrast with that which was given under the general provisions of the edict (edictalis).
Even supposing the bonorum possessor had an indefeasible title as such, the praetor did not necessarily guarantee him the succession against a possible heres, who might have remained satisfied with his civil law title. E.g. a suus is praeteritus in the father's will, by which the 4 septimo viro et uxori: octavo cognatis manumissoris. Sed eas quidem praetoria induxit iurisdictio. nobis tamen nihil incuriosum praetermissum est, sed nostris constitutionibus omnia corrigentes contra tabulas quidem et secundum tabulas bonorum possessiones admisimus utpote necessarias constitutas,
nec non ab intestato unde liberi et unde legitimi bonorum 5 possessiones. Quae autem in praetoris edicto quinto loco posita fuerat, id est unde decem personae, eam pio proposito et compendioso sermone supervacuam ostendimus : cum enim praefata bonorum possessio decem personas praeponebat extraneo manumissori, nostra constitutio, quam de emancipatione liberorum fecimus, omnibus parentibus eisdemque manumissoribus contracta fiducia manumissionem facere dedit, ut ipsa manumissio eorum hoc in se habeat privilegium et supervacua fiat praedicta bonorum possessio. sublata igitur praefata quinta bonorum possessione in gradum eius sextam antea bonorum possessionem reduximus et quintam fecimus, quam 6 praetor proximis cognatis pollicetur. Cumque antea septimo
loco fuerat bonorum possessio tum quam ex familia et octavo unde liberi patroni patronaeque et parentes eorum, utramque per constitutionem nostram, quam de iure patronatus fecimus, penitus vacuavimus: cum enim ad similitudinem successionis ingenuorum libertinorum successiones posuimus, quas usque ad quintum tantummodo gradum coartavimus, ut sit aliqua inter ingenuos et libertos differentia, sufficiunt eis tam contra tabulas bonorum possessio quam unde legitimi et unde cognati, ex quibus possint sua iura vindicare, omni scrupulositate et inextricabili errore duarum istarum bonorum possessionum resoluta. Aliam vero bonorum possessionem, quae unde vir 7 et uxor appellatur et nono loco inter veteres bonorum possessiones posita fuerat, et in suo vigore servavimus et altiore loco, id est sexto, eam posuimus, decima veteri bonorum possessione quae erat unde cognati manumissoris propter causas enarratas merito sublata : ut sex tantummodo bonorum possessiones ordinariae permaneant suo vigore pollentes. Septima eas secuta, quam optima ratione praetores 8 introduxerunt. novissime enim promittitur edicto his etiam bonorum possessio, quibus ut detur lege vel senatus consulto vel constitutione comprehensum est, quam neque bonorum possessionibus quae ab intestato veniunt neque eis quae ex testamento sunt praetor stabili iure connumeravit, sed quasi ultimum et extraordinarium auxilium, prout res exigit, accommodavit scilicet his, qui ex legibus senatus consultis constitutionibus principum ex novo iure vel ex testamento vel ab intestato veniunt. Cum igitur plures species successionum praetor introduxisset easque per ordinem disposuisset 9 et in unaquaque specie successionis saepe plures extent dispari gradu personae: ne actiones creditorum differantur, sed haberent quos convenirent, et ne facile in possessionem bonorum defuncti mittantur et eo modo sibi consulerent, ideo petendae bonorum possessioni certum tempus praefinivit. liberis itaque et parentibus tam naturalibus quam adoptivis in petenda bonorum possessione anni spatium, ceteris centum dierum dedit. Et si intra hoc tempus aliquis bonorum pos- 10 sessionem non petierit, eiusdem gradus personis adcrescit : vel si nemo sit, deinceps ceteris proinde bonorum possessionem ex successorio edicto pollicetur, ac si is qui praecedebat ex eo numero non esset. si quis itaque delatam sibi bonorum possessionem repudiaverit, non quousque tempus bonorum possessioni praefinitum excesserit exspectatur, sed statim ceteri ex eodem edicto admittuntur. In petenda autem 11 bonorum possessione dies utiles singuli considerantur. Sed 12
latter is avoided, so that he becomes heres ab intestato; the institutus in the will obtains bonorum possessio secundum tabulas : or upon an intestacy the cognates obtain bonorum possessio, while there is a suus or agnate as heres. Under such circumstances as these, if the claim of the praetorian successor is overridden by that of the heres, the bonorum possessio is said to be sine re, or ineffectual : 'bonorum possessio aut cum re datur, aut sine re : cum re, si is qui accepit cum effectu bona retineat : sine re, cum alius iure civili evincere hereditatem possit 'Ulpian, reg. 28. 13: cf. Gaius iii. 35-38. The rule upon this matter may be thus stated : where there is a collision between the civil and the praetorian title, the latter must yield to the former, and be sine re, except in cases of bonorum possessio iuris civilis impugnandi gratia, viz. where the possession is given to liberi upon intestacy, and to emancipated children contra tabulas, and in certain instances of bonorum possessio secundum tabulas, for which see on Bk. ii. 17. 6 supr.
§ 11. The distinction between tempus utile and continuum has been already explained on Bk. ii. 19. 5 supr. The idea of the former originated
bene anteriores principes et huic causae providerunt, ne quis pro petenda bonorum possessione curet, sed, quocumque modo
in the necessity of performing some act within a prescribed time, by the non-performance of which a right might be lost, and which might be interfered with either (1) by the courts being closed ; (2) by the absence of some person whose presence was essential, Dig. 44. 3. 1; (3) by some disability of the person by whom the act had to be performed, e.g. absence, illness, or excusable ignorance of his right. As a rule, time was reckoned as continuum ; it is usually utile when the interval for performance is not more than a year and is prescribed by law, and where the act itself is a judicial one.
Before finally leaving the subject of intestate succession it is necessary to notice briefly the important revolution which Justinian effected in its rules by Nov. 118, A. D. 543. By this he repealed all existing law on the subject : 'prioribus legibus pro hac causa positis cessantibus, de cetero ea sola servarique nunc constituimus.' The new system was based solely on cognation, between which and agnation it disowned any distinction, save so far as was involved in the recognition of adoptive relationship: it also treated males and females on precisely the same footing. Intestate successors were arranged in four classes, in the following order of priority:
(1) Descendants, division between these being in stirpes : 'tantam de hereditate morientis accipientes partem, quanticunque sint, quantam eorum parens, si viveret, habuisset, quam successionem in stirpes vocavit antiquitas' Nov. 118. 1: thus a descendant related to the deceased through both parents received a double portion. The descendant did not, however, in every case inherit the usufruct along with the proprietas; e. g. if the deceased was in potestas, note on Tit. 1. 15 supr. ; or if the deceased was a woman, the surviving husband was entitled to the usufruct of a part, Cod. 6. 60. 3.
(2) Ascendants, brothers and sisters of the whole blood, and descendants in the first degree only of such brothers and sisters deceased. A nearer was preferred to a remoter ascendant; if there were two or more ascendants in the same degree, they divided the succession per capita if they belonged to the same line (paternal or maternal); if to different lines, each line took half (Nov. 118. 2). Brothers and sisters divided per capita : if there were also children of a deceased brother or sister, they took together the share which would have gone to their parent (ib. 3). If there were both ascendants and brothers or sisters, or children of a deceased brother or sister, the division was in capita, the children, however, taking only one portion together.
(3) Brothers and sisters of the half blood, and descendants in the first degree of such brothers and sisters deceased.
(4) All other cognates, according to proximity, whether related by the whole or half blood : "si vero neque fratres neque filios fratrum, sicut diximus, defunctus reliquerit, omnes a latere cognatos ad hereditatem vocamus, secundum uniuscuiusque gradus praerogativam, ut viciniores
si admittentis eam indicium intra statuta tamen tempora ostenderit, plenum habeat earum beneficium.
Est et alterius generis per universitatem successio, quae neque lege duodecim tabularum neque praetoris edicto, sed eo iure, quod consensu receptum est, introducta est. Ecce 1 enim cum pater familias sese in adrogationem dat, omnes res eius corporales et incorporales quaeque ei debitae sunt adrogatori ante quidem pleno iure adquirebantur, exceptis his quae per capitis deminutionem pereunt quales sunt operarum obligationes et ius adgnationis. usus etenim et usus fructus, licet his antea connumerabantur, attamen capitis deminutione minima eos tolli nostra prohibuit constitutio. Nunc autem 2
gradu reliquis praeponantur. Si autem plurimi eiusdem gradus invenian-
Descendens omnis succedit in ordine primo :
Denique proximior reliquorum quisque superstes. $ 11. Failing even cognates, the praetorian rule of vir et uxor was followed. Under certain circumstances indeed a widow had a claim against the estate of her deceased husband, even when the latter left a will, or died intestate having other successors : i.e. when she was poor, and had no dos, she was entitled to a fourth of her husband's property, or, if there were more than three legitimate children born of the marriage, to a virilis portio, Nov. 117. 5.
Tit. X. So too in Dig. 1. 6. 8 patria potestas is said to be moribus recepta, and in iii. 82 Gaius ascribes the universal succession resulting from conventio in manum to the ius quod consensu receptum est.
51. For the extinction of usus and ususfructus by capitis deminutio minima see p. 210 supr. By operarum obligationes are meant operae liberti secured by stipulation or iurata promissio, Gaius iii. 83 : operae servorum sive animalium were not extinguished in this manner, note on Bk. ii. 5. 5 supr. : cf. Dig. 4. 5. 10; 7. 7. 2; 7. 8. 10. § 2. Over castrensia and quasi castrensia bona of adrogatus the adro