D. xxviii. T. 2. C. vi, T. 28, 29. Nov. 115. Jus vetus de liberis in potestate. NON tamen, ut omninò valeat The solemnities of law, before extestamentum, sufficit hæc observatio, quam supra exposuimus: sed, qui filium in potestate habet, curare debet, ut eum hæredem insti plained, are not alone sufficient to make a testament valid. For he, who has a son under his power, should take care either to institute him his heir, or to disinherit him by name: for, if he pass over his son in silence, the testament will have ng effect. And even if the son die liv tuat, vel exhæredem eum nominatim faciat. Alioqui, si eum silen-, tio præterierit, inutilitèr testabitur: adeò quidem ut, si vivo patre filius mortuus sit, nemo hæres ex eo tes-ing the father, yet no one can take tamento existere possit: quia scilicèt ab initio non constiterit testamentum. Sed non ita de filiabus, et aliis per virilem sexum descendentibus liberis utriusque sexus, antiquitati fuerat observatum: sed, si non fuerant scripti hæredes scriptæve, vel exhæredati exhæredat eve, testamentum quidem non infirmabatur, jus tamen accrescendi eis ad certam portionem præstabatur. Sed nec nominatim eas personas exhæredare parentibus necesse erat, sed licebat inter cæteros hoc facere. Nominatim autem quis exhæredari videtur, sivè ita exhæredetur, Titius filius meus exhæres esto, sive ita, filius meus exhæres esto, non adjecto proprio nomine; scilicèt, si alius filius non extet. De upon himself the heirship by virtue of such a testament, inasmuch as it was null from the beginning. But the ancients did not observe this rule in regard to daughters and grandchildren of either sex, though descended from the male line; for although these were neither instituted heirs, or disinherited, yet the testament was not invalidated; because a right of accretion intitled them to a certain portion of the inheritance: parents were therefore not necessitated to disinherit these children nominally, but might do it inter cæteros. A child is nominally disinherited, if the words of the will are let Titius my son be disinherited; or even thus; let my son be disinherited, without the addition of a proper name, provided the testator had no other son living. posthumis. § I. Posthumi quoque liberi vel hæredes instituti debent vel exhæredari: et in eo par omnium conditio est; quod et filio posthumo, et quolibet ex cæteris liberis, sive feminini sexus sive masculini, præterito, valet quidem testamentum, sed postea, agnatione posthumi sive posthumæ, rumpitur, et eâ ratione totum infirmatur. Ideòque, si mulier, ex quà posthumus aut posthuma sperabatur, abortum fecerit, nihil impedimento est scriptis hæ § 1. Also posthumous children should either be instituted heirs, or disinherited: and in this the condition of all children is equal: but, if a posthumous son, or any posthumous descendant in the right line, male or female, be pretermitted, the testament will nevertheless be valid at the time of making it; but, by the subsequent birth of a child of either sex, it will be annulled. And therefore, if a woman from whom a posthumous child is expected, should miscarry, redibus ad hæreditatem adeundam. Sed feminini quidem sexûs personæ vel nominatim vel inter cæteros exhæredari solebant: dùm tamen, si inter cæteros exhæredarentur, aliquid eis legaretur, nè viderentur præteritæ esse per oblivionem. Masculos verò posthumos, id est, filios et deinceps, placuit non alitèr rectè exhæredari, nisi nominatim exhæredarentur, hoc scilicèt modo, quicunque mihi filius genitus fuerit, exhæres esto. nothing can prevent the written heirs from entering upon the inheritance. But posthumous females muy be either nominally disinherited, or inter cæteros by a general clause: yet, if disinherited inter cæteros, something must be left them to show they were not omitted through forgetfulness. But male posthumous children, i. e. sons, and their descendants in the direct line, cannot be disinherited otherwise, than nominally in this form; whatever son is hereafter born to me, I disinhe rit him. De quasi posthumis. § II. Posthumorum autem loco sunt et hi, qui in sui hæredis locum succedendo, quasi agnascendo, fiunt parentibus sui hæredes: ut ecce, si quis filium, et ex eo nepotem neptemve, in potestate habeat, quia filius gradu præcedit, is solus jura sui hæredis habet; quamvis nepos quoque et neptis ex eo in eadem potestate sint. Sed, si filius ejus vivo co moriatur, aut qualibet aliâ ratione exeat de potestase ejus, incipit nepos neptisve in ejus locum succedere, et eo modo jura suorum hæredum quasi agnatione nanciscitur. Ne ergò eo modo rumpatur ejus testamentum, sicut ipsum filium yel hæredem instituere vel nominatim exhæredare debet, ne non jure faciat testamentum; ita et nepotem neptemve ex filio necesse est ei vel hæredem instituere vel exhæredare; ne fortè eo vivo, filio mortuo, succedendo in locum ejus nepos, neptisve, quasi agnascendo, rumpat tes § 2. Those are reckoned in the place of posthumous children, who, succeeding in the stead of proper heirs, become, by agnation, or quasibirth, proper heirs to their parents: thus, if Titius have a son under his power, and by him a grand-son, or grand-daughter, then would the son, because he is first in degree, have the sole right of a proper heir, although the grand-son, or grand-daughter by that son, is under the same parental power. But, if the son of Titius should die in his father's lifetime, or should by any other means cease to be' under his father's power, the grandson or grand-daughter would succeed in his place; and would thus, by what may be called a quasi-birth, obtain the right of a proper heir. Therefore, as it behoves a testator for his own security, either to institute or disinherit his son, lest his testament should be annulled, so it is equally necessary for him either tø tamentum. Idque lege Julia Velleia provisum est: in qua similis exhæredationis modus ad similitudinem posthumorum demonstratur. institute or disinherit his grand-son or grand-daughter by that son, lest, if his son should die in his (the testator's) life-time, his grand-son or grand-daughter, succeeding to the place of his son, should make void his testament by quasi agnation. This has been introduced by the law Julia Velleia, in which is set forth a form of disinheriting quasi-posthumous, like that of posthumous children. De emancipatis. III. Emancipatos liberos jure civili neque hæredes instituere, neque exhæredare, necesse est: quia non sunt sui hæredes. Sed prætor omnes, tam fœminini sexûs quam masculini, si hæredes non instituantur, exhæredari jubet; virilis sexus nominatim, fœminini vero intér cæteros: quia, si neque hæredes instituti fuerunt, neque ita (ut diximus) exhæredati, promittit eis pretor contra tabulas testamenti, bonorum possessionem. § 3. The civil law does not make it necessary, either to institute emancipated children heirs, or to disinherit them in a testament; inasmuch as they are not sui hæredes, i. e. proper heirs. But the prætor ordains, that all children male or female, if they be not instituted heirs, shall be disinherited; the males nominally; the females inter cæteros: for, if children have neither been insituted heirs, nor properly disinherited in manner before mentioned, the prætor gives them possession of the goods, contrary to the testament. De adoptivis. IV. Adoptivi liberi, quamdiù sunt in potestate patris adoptivi, ejusdem juris habentur, cujus sunt justis nuptiis quæsiti: itaque hæredes instituendi vel exhæredandi sunt, secundùm ea, que de naturalibus exposuimus. Emancipati verò à patre adoptivo, neque jure civili, neque eo jure, quod ad edictum pretoris attinet, inter liberos connumerantur. Qua ratione acci §4. Adopted children, while under the power of their adoptive father, are intitled to the rights of children born in lawful matrimony: and therefore they must either be instituted heirs, or disinherited, according to the rules laid down respecting natural (legitimate') children. › But neither by the civil law, or by prætorian eruity, are children emancipatedby an adoptive father, numbered V. Sed hæc quidem vetustas introducebat. Nostra vero constitutio, inter masculos et fœminas in hoc jure nihil interesse existimans, quia utraque persona in hominum procreatione simili naturæ officio fungitur, et lege antiquà duodecim tabularum omnes similitèr ad successionem ab intestato vocabantur, quod et prætores postea secuti esse videntur, ideò simplex ac simile jus, et in filiis et in filiabus et in cæteris descendentibus per virilem sexum personis, non solùm jam natis, sed etiam posthumis, introduxit ; ut omnes, sivè sui sivè emancipati sint, vel hæredes instituantur, vel nominatim exhæredentur: et eundem habeant effectum circa testamenta parentum suorum infirmanda, et hæreditatem auferendam, quem filii sui vel emancipati habent, sivè jam nati sint, sivè, adhuc in utero constituti, postea nati sint. Circa adoptivos autem filios certam induximus divisionem, qua in nostrâ constitutione, quam super adoptivis tulimus, continetur. § 5. These were the rules of old times. But we (not thinking, that any distinction can reasonably be. made between the two sexes, inasmuch as they equally contribute to the procreation of the species, and because, by the ancient law of the twelve tables, all children, were equally called to the succession ab intestato, which law the prætors seem afterwards to have followed) have by our constitution introduced the same law both as to sons and daughters, and also to all other descendants in the male line, whether in being, or posthumous: so that all children whether they are proper heirs or emancipated, must either be instituted heirs or disinherited by name: and they. posses the same influence as to avoiding the testament of the parent, and destroying the heirship, as the legitimate or emancipated children have, whether appointed as living or as posthumous children. In respect of adopted children, we have introduced certain regulations, which are contained in our constitution of adoptions. |