148 Legacies to an uncertain person invalid. TRIMONIUM COLLOCAVERIT, X MILIA SEIO DATO ; vel ita: SI FILIAM TITIO IN MATRIMONIUM NON COLLOCAVERIS, X MILIA TITIO DATO. sed et si heres verbi gratia intra biennium monumentum sibi non fecerit, x Titio dari iusserit, poenae nomine legatum est. et denique ex ipsa definitione multas similes species proprias fingere possumus. (236.) Nec libertas quidem poenae nomine dari potest; quamvis de ea re fuerit quaesitum. (237.) De tutore vero nihil possumus quaerere, quia non potest datione tutoris heres conpelli quidquam facere aut non facere; ideoque nec datur poenae nomine tutor; et si datus fuerit, magis sub condicione quam poenae nomine datus videbitur. 238. Incertae personae legatum inutiliter relinquitur. incerta autem videtur persona quam per incertam opinionem animo suo testator subicit, velut si ita legatum sit: QUI PRIMUS AD FUNUS MEUM VENERIT, EI HERES MEUS X MILIA DATO. let him give ten thousand sesterces to Seius:" or thus: "If you do not bestow your daughter in marriage on Titius, give ten thousand to Titius." And also', if he shall have ordered ten thousand to be given to Titius, “if the heir do not,” for example, "set up a monument to him within two years,” the legacy is by way of penalty. And in fact, from the mere definition we can invent many special cases of like character. 236. Not even freedom can be given by way of penalty, although this point has been questioned. 237. But as to a tutor, we can raise no question, because the heir cannot be compelled by the giving of a tutor to do or not to do anything: and therefore a tutor is not given by way of penalty: and if one be given, he is considered to be given under a condition rather than by way of penalty. 238. A legacy to an uncertain person is invalid. Now an uncertain person is considered to be one whom the testator brings before his mind without any clear notion of his individuality, for instance, if a legacy be given in these terms: "Let my heir give ten thousand sesterces to him who first 1 The si must be repeated: "Sed et si, si heres, etc." Conf. II. 155. Legacies "poenae nomine" were made valid by Justinian, who ordered them to be regarded as purely con ditional. 2 Ulpian, XXIV. 18. Legacies to posthumous strangers invalid. 149 idem iuris est, si generaliter omnibus legaverit: QUICUMQUE AD FUNUS MEUM VENERIT. in eadem causa est quod ita relinquitur: QUICUMQUE FILIO MEO IN MATRIMONIUM FILIAM SUAM CONLOCAVERIT, EI HERES MEUS X MILIA DATO. illud quoque in eadem causa est quod ita relinquitur: QUI POST TESTAMENTUM CONSULES DESIGNATI ERUNT, aeque incertis personis legari videtur. et denique aliae multi huiusmodi species sunt. Sub certa vero demonstratione incertae personae recte legatur, velut: EX COGNATIS MEIS QUI NUNC SUNT QUI PRIMUS AD FUNUS MEUM VENERIT, EI X MILIA HERES MEUS DATO. (239.) Libertas quoque non videtur incertae personae dari posse, quia lex Furia Caninia iubet nominatim servos liberari. (240.) Tutor quoque certus dari debet. 241. Postumo quoque alieno inutiliter legatur. est autem alienus postumus, qui natus inter suos heredes testatori futurus non est. ideoque ex emancipato quoque filio conceptus nepos extraneus est postumus avo; item qui in utero est eius quae comes to my funeral." The law is the same if he have made a general bequest to all: "Whosoever shall come to my funeral." Of the same character is a bequest thus made : "Let my heir give ten thousand to whatever man bestows his daughter in marriage on my son." And of the same character too is a bequest made thus: "Whoever shall be consuls designate after my testament (comes into operation);" for it is in like manner regarded as a legacy to uncertain persons. And there are in fine many other instances of this kind. But a legacy is validly left to an uncertain person under a definite description, for instance; "Let my heir give ten thousand to that one of my relations now alive who first comes to my funeral." 239. It is also not considered allowable for liberty to be given to an uncertain person, because the Lex Furia Caninia orders slaves to be liberated by name1. 240. A person given as a tutor ought also to be definite. 241. A legacy left to a posthumous stranger is also invalid. Now a posthumous stranger is a person who, if born, would not be a suus heres of the testator. Therefore even a grandchild conceived from an emancipated son is a posthumous stranger in regard to his grandfather: likewise the child conceived by 1 Ulpian, L 25. See note on I. 45. 150 Legatees under the potestas of the heir. conubio non interveniente ducta est uxor, extraneus postumus patri contingit. 242. Ac ne heres quidem potest institui postumus alienus: est enim incerta persona. (243.) Cetera vero quae supra diximus ad legata proprie pertinent; quamquam non inmerito quibusdam placeat poenae nomine heredem institui non posse: nihil enim intererit, utrum legatum dare iubeatur heres, si fecerit aliquid aut non fecerit, an coheres ei adiciatur; quia tam coheredis adiectione quam legati datione conpellitur, ut aliquid contra propositum suum faciat. 244. An ei qui in potestate sit eius quem heredem instituimus recte legemus, quaeritur. Servius recte legari probat, sed evanescere legatum, si quo tempore dies legatorum cedere solet, adhuc in potestate sit; ideoque sive pure legatum sit et vivo testatore id potestate heredis esse desierit, sive sub condicione et ante condicionem in acciderit, deberi legatum. Sa a wife who was married without conubium is a posthumous stranger in regard to his father. 242. A posthumous stranger cannot even be appointed heir: for he is an uncertain person1. 243. But all the other points which we have mentioned above apply to legacies solely: although some hold, not without reason, that an heir cannot be instituted by way of penalty for it will make no difference whether the heir be bidden to give a legacy in case he do or fail to do something, or whether a co-heir be joined on to him because as well by the addition of a co-heir, as by the giving of a legacy, he is compelled to do something against his wish. 244. It is a disputed point whether we can validly give a legacy to one who is in the potestas of him whom we institute heir3. Servius maintains that the legacy is valid, but becomes void if the legatee be still in potestas at the time when the legacy usually vests'; and therefore, if either the legacy be left unconditionally, and during the testator's lifetime he cease to be in the potestas of the heir; or under condition, and the same occur before fulfilment of the condition, the legacy is due. 2 II. 229, 232, 233. 3 Ulpian, XXIV. 23. pere deberi pecuniam: venire diem, significat eum diem venisse, quo pecunia peti potest." Ulpian. See D. "Cedere diem significat inci- 50. 16. 213. pr. Legatees under the potestas of the heir. 151 binus et Cassius sub condicione recte legari, pure non recte, putant: licet enim vivo testatore possit desinere in potestate heredis esse, ideo tamen inutile legatum intelligi oportere, quia quod nullas vires habiturum foret, si statim post testamentum factum decessisset testator, hoc ideo valere quia vitam longius traxerit, absurdum esset. diversae scholae auctores nec sub condicione recte legari putant, quia quos in potestate habemus, eis non magis sub condicione quam pure debere possumus. (245.) Ex diverso constat ab eo qui in potestate tua est, herede instituto, recte tibi legari: sed si tu per eum heres extiteris, evanescere legatum, quia ipse tibi legatum debere non possis; si vero filius emancipatus aut servus manumissus erit vel in alium translatus, et ipse heres extiterit aut alium fecerit, deberi legatum. 246. Hinc transeamus ad fideicommissa. Sabinus and Cassius think that a legacy can be left validly under condition, not validly unconditionally: for that although the legatee may happen to cease to be in the potestas of the heir during the testator's lifetime, yet the legacy ought to be considered invalid for this reason, that it is absurd that what would have been invalid, if the testator had died immediately after making the testament, should be valid because he has lived longer'. The authorities of the other school think that a legacy cannot be left validly even under a condition, because we cannot be indebted to those who are in our potestas any more under a condition than unconditionally. 245. On the contrary, it is allowed that a legacy can validly be given to you, payable by one under your potestas who is instituted heir2: yet if you become heir through him, the legacy is inoperative, because you cannot owe a legacy to yourself: but if the son be emancipated, or the slave manumitted or transferred to another, and become heir himself or make another heir, the legacy is due. 246. Now let us pass on to fideicommissa3. 1 This is Cato's rule: " Quod, si testamenti facti tempore decessisset testator, inutile foret, id legatum, quandocunque decesserit, non lere." D. 34. 7. I. pr. 2 Ulpian, XXIV. 24. va 3 Fideicommissum was a bequest given by way of request, not by way of order; and was held to be due on the equitable ground of respecting the testator's desires : "Fideicommissum est quod non civilibus verbis, sed precative relinquitur, nec ex rigore juris civilis proficiscitur, sed ex voluntate datur relinquentis." Ulpian, XXV. 1. 152 Fideicommissary inheritances. 247. Et prius de hereditatibus videamus. 248. Inprimis igitur sciendum est opus esse, ut aliquis heres recto iure instituatur, eiusque fidei committatur, ut eam hereditatem alii restituat: alioquin inutile est testamentum in quo nemo recto iure heres instituitur. (249.) Verba autem utilia fideicommissorum haec recte maxime in usu esse videntur : PETO, ROGO, VOLO, FIDEICOMMITTO: quae proinde firma singula sunt, atque si omnia in unum congesta sint. (250.) Cum igitur scripserimus: LUCIUS TITIUS HERES ESTO, possumus adicere: ROGO TE, LUCI TITI, PETOQUE A TE, UT CUM PRIMUM POSSIS HEREDITATEM MEAM ADIRE, GAIO SEIO REDDAS RESTITUAS. possumus autem et de parte restituenda rogare; et liberum est vel sub condicione vel pure relinquere fideicommissa, vel ex die certa. (251.) Restituta autem hereditate is qui restituit nihilominus heres permanet; is vero qui recipit hereditatem, aliquando heredis loco est, aliquando legatarii. (252.) Olim autem nec heredis loco erat nec legatarii, sed potius emptoris. tunc enim in usu erat ei cui restituebatur hereditas nummo uno eam 247. And first let us consider as to inheritances. 248. First, then, we must know that some heir must be instituted in due form, and that it must be entrusted to his good faith that he deliver over the inheritance to another: for if this be not done, a testament is invalid in which no heir is instituted in due form. 249. The proper phraseology for fideicommissa gene, rally employed is this: "I beg, I ask, I wish, I commit to your good faith:" and these words are equally binding when employed singly, as though they were all united into one. 250. When, therefore, we have written: "Let Lucius Titius be heir;" we may add: “I ask you, Lucius Titius, and beg of you, that as soon as you can enter on my inheritance, you will render and deliver it over to Gaius Seius." We may also ask him to deliver over a part: and it is in our power to leave fideicom+ missa either under condition, or unconditionally, or from a specified day. 251. Now when the inheritance is delivered over, he who has delivered it still remains heir: but he who receives the inheritance is sometimes in the place of heir, sometimes of legatee. 252. But formerly he used to be neither in the place of heir nor of legatee, but rather of purchaser. For it was then usual for the inheritance to be sold for a single coin and as a mere formality to him to whom it |