Page images

i6o Fideicommissa and legacies contrasted.

linquere possumus. (272.) Item servo alieno directo libertas dari non potest: sed per fideicommissum potest. (273.) Item codicillis nemo heres institui potest neque exheredan, quamvis testamento confirmad sint. at hic qui testamento heres institutus est potest codicillis rogari, ut eam hereditatem alii totam vel ex parte restituat, quamvis testamento codicilli confirmad non sint. (274.) Item mulier quae ab eo qui centum milia aeris census est per legem Voconiam heres institui non potest, tamen fideicommisso relictam sibi hereditatem capere potest. (275.) Latini quoque qui hereditates legataquí directo iure lege Iunia capere prohibentur, ex fideicommisso capere possunt. (276.) Item cum senatusconsulto prohibitum sit proprium servum minorem annis xxx liberum et heredem instituere, plerisque placet posse nos iubere liberum esse, cum annorum xxx erit, et rogare, ut tunc illi restituatur hereditas. (277.) Item

already have left a fideicommissum. 272. Likewise, liberty cannot be given directly to another man's slave, but it can be given by fideicommissum^. 273. Likewise, no one can be instituted heir or disinherited by codicils, even though they be confirmed by testament. But the heir instituted by testament may be asked in codicils to deliver over the inheritance, wholly or in part, to another, even though the codicils be not confirmed by testament*. 274. Likewise, a woman, who by the Lex Voconia could not be instituted heir by any one registered3 as having more than 100,000 asses, may still take an inheritance left her by fideicommissum. 275. Latins also, who are prevented by the Lex Junia from taking inheritances or legacies bequeathed directly, can take by fideicommissum*. 276. Likewise, although we are forbidden by a senatusconsultum to appoint free and heir our own slave who is under thirty years of age, yet it is generally held that we may order him to be free when he shall arrive at the age of thirty, and ask that the inheritance be then delivered over to him5.

1 11. 264, 267. 4 1. 23, 24.

3 Ulpian, xxv. 11. * 1. 18. It was not by a senatus

3 Sc. by the censors. The law is consultum but by a Lex (Aelia Sen

referred to by Cicero, in Verrem, II. tía) that men were forbidden to ma

1. с 41, Pro Balbo, с 8, and De Re- numit a slave under thirty: still

pub. i11. с io. Anqther provision of there need be no contradiction be

the law is mentioned in 11. 326. tween this passage and 1. 18. TesFideicommissa and legacies contrasted. 161 164 Fideicommissa and legacies contrasted.

quamvis non possimus post mortem eius qui nobis heres extiterit, alium in locum eius heredem instituere, tamen possumus eum rogare, ut cum morietur, alii eam hereditatem totam vel ex parte restituat. et quia post mortem quoque heredis fideicommissum dari potest, idem efficere possumus et si ita scripserimus: Cum Titius Heres Meus Mortuus Erit, Volo Heredi


modo, tam hoc quam illo, Titiuj heredem suum obligatum relinquit de fideicommisso restituendo. (278.) Praeterea legata per formulam petimus : fideicommissa vero Romae quidem aput Consulem vel aput eum Praetorem qui praecipue de fideicommissis ius dicit persequimur; in provinciis vero aput Praesidem provinciae. (279.) Item de fideicommissis semper in urbe ius

277. Likewise, although we cannot institute after the death of him who becomes our heir another heir to take his place \ yet we can ask him to deliver over to another, when he shall be dying, the inheritance wholly or in part. And since a fideicommissum can be given even after the death of the heir*, we can produce the same effect also if we word our bequest thus: "When Titius, my heir, shall be dead, I wish my inheritance to belong to Publius Maevius." By each of these methods, both the first and the second, Titius leaves his heir bound to deliver over a fideicommissum. 278. Moreover, we sue for legacies by means of a formula3: but we proceed for fideicommissa, at Rome before the Consul, or the Praetor4 whose special jurisdiction is over fideicommissa, in the provinces before the governor. 279. Likewise, judgment is given regarding fideicommissa at any time in the city: but regarding

tators, to avoid the operation of the thirty years old: or if we consider

Lex Aelia Sentia, had probably ap- that the heir ab irttestato might oc

pointed slaves under thirty, not as cupy during the interval, then the

heirs immediately, but to be heirs S.C. confutes us by the equalJy trite

when they reached the age of thirty, maxim: "Semelheres, semper he

and this was rendered invalid by the res."

S.C. The S.C. therefore merely ap- 1 II. 184.

plied to a particular case the well- 2 But not alegacy: see II. 232.

known maxim: "Nemo partim tes- 3 IV. 30 et seqq.

tatus, partim intestatus decedere po- * Ulpian, xxv. 12: "Jus omne

test:" for there would be an intes- fideicommissorum non in vindica

tacy from the time of the testator's tione, sed in petitione consistet."

death to that when the heir became Paulus, S. iP.jv. I. § 18.

Î02 Fideicommissa and legacies contrasted.

dicitur: de legatis vero, cum res aguntur. (280.) Fideicommissorum usurae et fructus debentur, si modo moram solutionis fecerit qui fideicommissum debebit: legatorum vero usurae non debentur; idque rescripto divi Hadriani significatur. scio tamen Iuliano placuuse in eo legato quod sinendi modo relinquitur idem iuris esse quod in fideicommissis: quam sententiam et his temporibus magis optinere video. (281.) Item legata Graeme scripta non valent: fideicommissa vero valent. (282.) Item si legatum per damnationem relictum heres infiV/etur, in duplum cum eo agitur: fideicommissi vero nomine semper in simplum persecutio est. (283.) Item quod quisque ex fideicommisso plus debito per errorem solvent, repetere potest: at id quod ex causa falsa per damnationem legati plus debito solutum sit, repeti non potest. idem scilicet iur/s est de eo [legato] quod non debitum vel ex hac vel ex illa causa per errorem solutum fuerit.

284. Erant etiam aliae differentiae, quae nunc non sunt.

legacies only on days appointed for such business. 280. The interest and profits of fideicommissa are due, in case he who has to pay a. fideicommissum makes delay of payment: but the interest of legacies is not due: and this is stated in a rescript of the late emperor Hadrian. I know, however, that Julianus thought the rule was the same in a legacy left sinendi modo1 as in fideicommissa, and I see that this opinion prevails at the present time too. 281. Likewise, legacies written in Greek are invalid, but fideicommissa are valid*. 282. Likewise, if the heir deny that a legacy has been left by damnation3, the action lies against him for double: but the suit for fideicommissa is always for the value only. 283. Likewise, a man can reclaim what he has paid by mistake beyond what was due under a. fideicommissum: whilst that which has for an erroneous reason been paid beyond what is due under a legacy by damnation cannot be recovered4. The same undoubtedly is the law as to a legacy which, though not due, has for some cause or other been paid by mistake5.

284. There used to be other differences; but these do not

1 II. 209. 6 In the first case the legacy is

2 Ulpian, XXV. 9. due, but there is a payment in excess:

3 H. 201. in the second case no legacy is due, * Ulpian, xxiv. 33. at all.

Fideicommissa and legacies contrasted. 163

(285.) Ut ecce peregrini poterant fidezcommissa ia/ere: et fere ha«: fuit origo fide/commisstf/wrc. sed postea id prohibitum est; et nunc ex oratione divi Hadriani senatusconsultuw factum est, nt ea fidezcommissa fiico vindicarentur. (286.) Caeli^es quoque qui per legem Iuliam hereditates legataque capere prohibentur, olim fideicommissa videbantur capere posse. Item orbi qui per legem Papiam, ob id quod liberos non habent, dimidias partes hereditatum legatorumque perdunt, olim solida fideicommissa videbantur capere posse. sed postea senatusconsulto Pegasiano perinde fidezcommissa quoque, ac legate hereditatesque capere posse prohibi ti sunt. eaque translata sunt ad eos qui testamento liberos habent, aut si null«s liberos habebit, ad populum, sicuti iuris est in legatis et in hereditatibus. (287.) Eadem aut simib' ex causa autem olim incertae personae vel postumo alieno per fideicommissum relinquipoterat, quamvis neque heres institui neque legari ei possit. sed senatus

now exist. 285. For instance, foreigners could take fidei commissa1: and this was almost the first instance of fideicommissa. But afterwards this was forbidden: and now a stnatusconsultum has been enacted, at the instance of the late emperor Hadrian, that such fideicommissa are to be claimed for the fiscus. 286. Unmarried persons also, who by the Lex Julia are debarred from taking inheritances and legacies, were in olden times considered capable of taking fideicommissa*. Likewise, orbi, who by the Lex Papia lose half their inheritances and legacies because they have no children, were in olden times considered capable of taking fideicommissa in full. But afterwards by the senatusconsultum Pegasianum they were forbidden to take fideicommissa as well as inheritances or legacies. And these were transferred to those persons named in the testament who have children, or if none of them have children, to the popuhcs, just as the rule is regarding legacies and inheritances3. 287. For the same or a similar reason, too, a fideicommissum could formerly be left to an uncertain person or posthumous stranger, although such an one could not be appointed either heir or legatee*. But by a senatusconsultum which was made at

[ocr errors]

consulto quod auctore diz/o Hadriano factum est idem in fideicommissis quod in legatis hereditatibusque constitutum est (288.) Item poenae nomine iam non dubitatur nec per fideicommissum quidem relinqui posse. (289.) Sed quamvis in mult/s iuris partibus longe latior causa sit fideicommissorum, quam eorum quae directo relin^«untur, in quibus</am tantumdem valeant: tamen tutor non aliter testamento dari potest quam directo, veluti hoc modo: Liberis Meis Titius Tutor Esto, vel ita: Liberis Meis Titium Tutorem Do: per fideicommissum vero dari non potest.

the instance of the late emperor Hadrian the same rule was established with regard to fideicommissa as with regard to legacies and inheritances. 288. Likewise, there is now no doubt that a bequest by way of penalty cannot be made even by fideicommissum. 289. But although in many points of law the scope of fideicommissa is far more comprehensive than that of direct bequests, and in others the two are of equal effect, yet a tutor cannot be given in a testament in any manner except directly, for instance thus: "Titius be tutor to my children:" or thus, "I give Titius as tutor to my children:" and he cannot be given by fideicommissum.

« PreviousContinue »