another person (successor), such as occurs, for instance, in the voluntary alienation of property. Here the same dominion that was previously exercised by the alienor is subsequently exercised by the alienee. The right continues the same; the person invested therewith is changed. It was characteristic of jus in personam or obligation (before, at least, the invention of papers payable to the holder and transferable by delivery) that it was not capable of a similar alienation. All that could be done to accomplish a similar result was to employ one of two cumbrous processes, Novation or Cession of Action (Procuration), 2 § 38. In these procedures there is no Succession, for in Novation the transferree is not invested with the same right that previously vested in the transferror, but a new right is created in the transferree while the old right of the transferror is extinguished: and in Procuration or Cession the right still continues vested in the transferror, who allows the transferree to recover it or enforce it by action and retain the fruits of the recovery. This inalienability of obligations, however, was confined to SINGULAR successions (in singularum rerum dominium successio). UNIVERSAL succession (per universitatem successio) or the transmission of the ideal whole of a patrimony, of which we have an example in hereditas testamentary or intestate, differed from SINGULAR succession by the capacity of passing obligation as well as Dominion. The heres of the testator or intestate sued and was sued in his own name on the obligations, active or passive, that originally vested in the deceased. But UNIVERSAL succession was an institution only recognised by Roman jurisprudence in certain definite cases. It was a formidable operation and rigorously circumscribed. It was not a transaction that the law allowed to be accomplished at the discretion of individual parties in pursuance of private convention. It was only admitted in the cases enumerated by Gaius, 2 § 98, and, without legislative interference, the list could not be augmented. These difficulties in the transfer of obligation opposed a great obstacle to the transfer (restitutio) of trust successions: and these difficulties were partially removed by the Sc. Trebellianum and Se. Pegasianum, and more completely by Justinian, by investing the Restitutio with the character of successio per universitatem, in other words, by the legislative sanction of a new instance of UNIVERSAL succession. DE SINGULIS REBUS PER FIDEICOMMISSUM RELICTIS. § 260. Potest autem quisque etiam res singulas per fideicommissum relinquere, velut fundum, hominem, vestem, argentum, pecuniam; et vel ipsum heredem rogare, ut alicui restituat, vel legatarium, quamvis a legatario legari non possit. § 261. Item potest non solum propria testatoris res per fideicommissum relinqui, sed etiam heredis aut legatarii aut cuiuslibet alterius. itaque et legatarius non solum de ea re rogari potest, ut eam alicui restituat, quae ei legata sit, sed etiam de alia, sive ipsius legatarii sive aliena sit. sed hoc solum observandum est, ne plus quisquam rogetur alicui restituere, quam ipse ex testamento ceperit: nam quod amplius est inutiliter relinquitur. § 262. Cum autem aliena res per fideicommissum relinquitur, necesse est ei qui rogatus est, aut ipsam redimere et praestare, aut aestimationem eius solvere. sicut iuris est, si per damnationem aliena res legata sit. sunt tamen qui putant, si rem per fideicommissum relictam dominus non vendat, extingui fideicommissum: sed aliam esse causam per damnationem legati. § 263. Libertas quoque servo per fideicommissum dari potest, ut vel heres rogetur manumittere, vel legatarius. § 264. Nec interest utrum de suo proprio servo testator roget, an de eo qui ipsius heredis aut legatarii vel etiam extranei sit. § 265. Itaque et alienus servus redimi et manumitti debet. quod si dominus eum non vendat, sane extinguitur libertas, quia pro libertate pretii computatio nulla intervenit. § 266. Qui autem ex fideicommisso manumittitur, non testatoris $260. Not only aggregates of right, but single rights, may be left in trust, as property in land, in a slave, in a garment, in plate, in money; and the trust may be imposed either on an heir or on a legatee, although a legatee cannot be charged with a legacy. § 261. Not only the testator's property, but that of an heir, or legatee, or stranger, may be left in trust. Thus a legatee may be charged with a trust to transfer either a thing bequeathed to him, or any other thing belonging to himself or to a stranger; provided always that he is not charged with a trust to transfer more than he takes under the will, for in respect of such excess the trust would be void. § 262. When a stranger's property is left by trust, the trustee must either procure and convey the specific thing or pay its valuation, like an heir charged under a bequest by condemnation; though some hold that the owner's refusal to sell avoids a trust to convey while it does not avoid a bequest by condemnation. § 263. Liberty can be left to a slave by a trust charging either an heir or a legatee with his manumission. § 264. And it makes no difference whether the slave is the property of the testator, of the heir, of the legatee, or of a stranger. § 265. A stranger's slave, therefore, must be purchased and manumitted, but his owner's refusal to sell extinguishes the gift of liberty, because liberty admits of no pecuniary compensation. § 266. A trust of manumission makes the slave the freedman, not fit libertus, etiamsi testatoris servus sit, sed eius qui manumittit. $267. At qui directo, testamento, liber esse iubetur, velut hoc modo: STICHUS SERVUS MEUS LIBER ESTO, vel STICHUM SERVUM MEUM LIBERUM ESSE IUBEO, is ipsius testatoris fit libertus. Nec alius ullus directo, ex testamento, libertatem habere potest, quam qui utroque tempore testatoris ex iure Quiritium fuerit, et quo faceret testamentum et quo moreretur. § 268. Multum autem differunt quae per fideicommissum relinquuntur ab his quae directo iure legantur. § 269. Nam ecce per fideicommissum etiam nutu hereditas relinqui potest cum alioquin legatum nisi testamento facto inutile sit. § 270. Item intestatus moriturus potest ab eo ad quem bona eius pertinent fideicommissum alicui relinquere: cum alioquin ab eo legari non possit. § 270 a. Item legatum codicillis relictum non aliter valet, quam si a testatore confirmati fuerint, id est nisi in testamento caverit testator, ut quidquid in codicillis scripserit id ratum sit: fideicommissum vero etiam non confirmatis codicillis relinqui potest. § 271. Item a legatario legari non potest: sed fideicommissum relinqui potest. quin etiam ab eo quoque cui per fideicommissum relinquimus rursus alii per fideicommissum relinquere possumus. § 272. Item servo alieno directo libertas dari non potest: sed per fideicommissum potest. § 273. Item codicillis nemo heres institui potest neque exheredari, quamvis testamento confirmati sint. at hic qui testamento heres institutus est potest codicillis rogari, ut eam hereditatem alii totam vel ex parte restituat, quamvis testamento codicilli confirmati 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 legataque 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 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 HEREDITATEM MEAM AD PUBLIUM MAEVIUM PERTINERE. utroque autem modo, tam hoc quam illo, Titius 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 dicitur: de legatis vero, cum res aguntur. Ꭱ or in part to another person without any previous ratification by will. § 274. A woman, whom a testator registered in the census as owning a hundred thousand sesterces is forbidden by the lex Voconia to institute heiress, can take the succession by the intervention of a trustee. $275. Latin Juniani, who are disabled by the lex Junia from taking an inheritance or legacy by direct devise, can take it by means of a declaration of trust. § 276. A decree of the senate (rather, the lex Aelia Sentia 1 § 18) incapacitates a testator's slave under thirty years of age for being enfranchised and instituted heir; but, according to the prevalent opinion, he can be ordered to be free on attaining the age of thirty, and the heir may be bound by a declaration of trust to then convey the inheritance to him. § 277. An heir in remainder after the death of a prior heir cannot be instituted, but an heir may be bound by a declaration of trust to convey the estate, when he dies, in whole or in part to another person; or, as a trust may be limited to take effect after the death of the trustee, the same purpose may be accomplished in these terms: When my heir is dead, I wish my inheritance to go to Publius Mevius ;' and whichever terms are employed, the heir of my heir is bound by a trust to convey the inheritance to the person designated. § 278. Legacies are recovered by judex and formula; trusts are enforced by the extraordinary jurisdiction of the consul or praetor fideicommissarius at Rome; in the provinces by the extraordinary jurisdiction of the president. $279. Cases of trust are heard and determined at Rome at all times of the year; cases of legacy can only be litigated during term. § 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 placuisse in eo legato quod sinendi modo relinquitur idem iuris esse quod in fideicommissis: quam sententiam et his temporibus magis optinere video. § 281. Item legata Graece scripta non valent: fideicommissa vero valent. § 282. Item si legatum per damnationem relictum heres infitietur, in duplum cum eo agitur: fideicommissi vero nomine semper in simplum persecutio est. § 283. Item quod quisque ex fideicommisso plus debito per errorem solverit, repetere potest: at id quod ex causa falsa per damnationem legati plus debito solutum sit, repeti non potest. idem scilicet. iuris 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. $285. Ut ecce peregrini poterant fideicommissa capere: et fere haec fuit origo fideicommissorum. sed postea id prohibitum est; et nunc ex oratione divi Hadriani senatusconsultum factum est, ut ea fideicommissa fisco vindicarentur. § 286. Caelibes 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 § 280. Trusts entitle to payment of interest and interim profits on delay of performance by the trustee; legatees are not entitled to interest, as a rescript of Hadrian declares. Julianus, however, held that a legacy bequeathed in the form of permission is on the same footing as a trust, and this is now the prevalent doctrine. § 281. Bequests expressed in Greek are invalid; trusts expressed in Greek are valid. § 282. An heir who disputes a legacy in the form of condemnation is sued for double the sum bequeathed; a trustee is only suable for the simple amount of the subject of trust. $283. On overpayment by mistake in the case of a trust, the excess can be recovered back by the trustee; on overpayment by mistake of a bequest by condemnation, the excess cannot be recovered back by the heir; so, on total failure of a disposition and payment by mistake, a trust sum can, a legacy by condemnation cannot, be recovered back. § 284. There formerly were other differences which are now abolished. § 285. Thus aliens could be benefited by a declaration of trust, and this was the principal motive in which trusts originated, but afterwards they were incapacitated; and now, by a decree of the senate passed on the proposition of Hadrian, property devised in trust for the benefit of aliens is confiscated. § 286. Celibates, who are disabled by the lex Julia from taking successions or legacies, were formerly deemed capable of benefiting by a declaration of trust. And childless persons, who forfeit by the lex Papia half the successions and legacies destined for |