Quando dies legatorum vel fideicommissorum cedat
(At what time legacies or trusts take effect.)
1 Paulus libro secundo ad Sabinum. Mortuo patre, licet vivo pupillo, dies legatorum a substituto datorum cedit.
1 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book II. Legacies, with which a substitute is charged, take effect from the death of the father, even though the minor be living.
2 Ulpianus libro quinto decimo ad Sabinum. Si pure sit usus fructus legatus vel usus vel habitatio, neque eorum dies ante aditam hereditatem cedit neque petitio ad heredem transit. idem et si ex die sit usus fructus relictus:
2 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XV. Where the legacy of an usufruct, or use, or the right of habitation is bequeathed, it does not take effect until the estate is entered upon, and an action for its recovery does not pass to the heir. The same rule applies where an usufruct is bequeathed to begin at a certain time.
3 Idem libro quinto disputationum. nam cum ad heredem non transferatur, frustra est, si ante quis diem eius cedere dixerit.
3 The Same, Disputations, Book V. For, as these rights cannot be transferred to the heir, it will be in vain to fix a day before that, when they will begin to take effect.
4 Idem libro nono decimo ad Sabinum. Si ‘cum heres morietur’ legetur, condicionale legatum est: denique vivo herede defunctus legatarius ad heredem non transfert. si vero ‘cum ipse legatarius morietur’ legetur ei, certum est legatum ad heredem transmitti.
4 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XIX. If a bequest is made to anyone to take effect at the time of the death of the heir, the legacy is conditional, so that if the legatee should die during the lifetime of the heir, he will not transmit his right to his own heir. If, however, the bequest should be made to the legatee to take effect at the time of his own death, it is certain that the legacy will pass to his heir.
5 Idem libro vicesimo ad Sabinum. Si post diem legati cedentem legatarius decesserit, ad heredem suum transfert legatum. 1Itaque si purum legatum sit, ex die mortis dies eius cedit: si vero post diem sint legata relicta, simili modo atque in puris dies cedit, nisi forte id fuit legatum, quod ad heredem non transit: nam huius dies non ante cedit, ut puta si usus fructus sit post annum relictus: hanc enim sententiam probamus. 2Sed si sub condicione sit legatum relictum, non prius dies legati cedit quam condicio fuerit impleta, ne quidem si ea sit condicio, quae in potestate sit legatarii. 3Sed si ea condicio fuit, quam praetor remittit, statim dies cedit: 4Idemque et in impossibili condicione, quia pro puro hoc legatum habetur. 5Item si qua condicio sit, quae per legatarium non stat quo minus impleatur, sed aut per heredem aut per eius personam, in cuius persona iussus est parere condicioni, dies legati cedit, quoniam pro impleta habetur: ut puta si iussus sim heredi decem dare et ille accipere nolit. sed et si ita mihi legatum sit, si Seiam uxorem duxero, nec ea velit nubere, dicendum erit diem legati cedere, quod per me non stat, quo minus paream condicioni, sed per alium stat, quo minus impleatur condicio. 6Isdem autem diebus, id est isdem pensionibus heredi praestabitur legatum, quibus legatario ipsi praestabatur. 7Si, cum dies legati cedere inciperet, alieni quis iuris est, deberi his legatum, quorum iuri fuit subiectus. et ideo si purum legatum fuerit et post diem legati cedentem liber factus est, apud dominum legatum relinquet: sed si usus fructus fuerit legatus, licet post mortem testatoris, ante aditam tamen hereditatem sui iuris efficiatur, sibi legatum adquirit.
5 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XX. If a legatee should die after the time when the legacy begins to take effect, he will transmit it to his own heir. 1Therefore, if a legacy is bequeathed absolutely, it begins to become operative from the day of the death of the person who bequeathed it. Where, however, legacies are bequeathed to take effect after a certain date, they begin to vest just as other absolute legacies do; unless something has been bequeathed which does not pass to the heir, for one of this kind will not become operative before the time prescribed; as for instance, where an usufruct is left to take effect after a year. We approve this opinion. 2But where a legacy is bequeathed under a condition, it does not begin to vest before the condition is complied with, provided it is in the power of the legatee to comply with it. 3Where, however, the condition is of such a nature that compliance with it is generally excused by the Prætor, it takes effect at once. 4The same rule applies to a condition which is impossible, because a legacy of this kind is considered to be bequeathed absolutely. 5Likewise, where the condition is such that the legatee is not responsible for non-compliance with it, but it is the fault of the heir, or of some other person who has been ordered to comply with the condition, the legacy will take effect, as the condition is considered to have been fulfilled; as, for instance, if I should be ordered to pay the heir ten OMrei, and he refuses to accept them. Where, however, a legacy is bequeathed to me if I marry Seia, and she is unwilling to marry me, it must be said that the legacy commences to vest, because it is not my fault that I do not comply with the condition, but another is to blame for its not being fulfilled. 6A legacy shall be paid to the heir of the legatee at the same times, that is to say, in the same instalments as it is paid to the legatee himself. 7If, when a legacy commences to be due, the legatee is under the control of someone else, it will be payable to those to whose authority he is subject. Hence, if the legacy is left absolutely to a slave, and he becomes free after the day when it is payable, the legacy will belong to his master. If, however, an usufruct is bequeathed, the slave will acquire the legacy for himself, even though he should become free after the death of the testator, and before the estate has been entered upon.
6 Paulus libro tertio ad Sabinum. Quod pure datum est si sub condicione adimatur, quasi sub condicione legatum habetur. 1At si extrinsecus suspendatur legatum, non ex ipso testamento: licet ante decedat legatarius, ad heredem transmississe legatum dicimus: veluti si rem dotalem maritus legaverit extero et uxori aliquam pro dotali re pecuniam, deinde deliberante uxore de electione dotis decesserit legatarius atque legatum elegerit mulier, ad heredem transire legatum dictum est. idque et Iulianus respondit: magis enim mora quam condicio legato iniecta videtur. 2Eorum legatorum, quae in codicillis relicta sunt, perinde dies cedit atque testamento relictorum.
6 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book III. Where a legacy is bequeathed absolutely, and is taken away under a condition, it is held to have been bequeathed conditionally. 1If the effect of a legacy should be suspended for some reason which has no reference to the will, we hold that it will be transmitted to the heir, even though the legatee should die before it becomes operative. For instance, if a husband should bequeath dotal property to a stranger, and a certain sum of money to his wife in lieu of the said dotal property, and the legatee should die while the wife is deliberating as to the election of her dowry, and should choose the legacy, it has been decided that the legacy will pass to the heir. Julianus adopted this opinion, for delay rather than a condition seems to be attached to the legacy. 2Legacies which are bequeathed by codicils take effect at the same time as those left by will.
7 Ulpianus libro vicesimo ad Sabinum. Heredis aditio moram legati quidem petitioni facit, cessioni diei non facit. 1Proinde sive pure institutus tardius adeat sive sub condicione per condicionem impediatur, legatarius securus est. 2Sed et si nondum natus sit heres institutus aut apud hostes sit, similiter legatario non nocebit, eo quod dies legati cessit. 3Inde dicimus et si a substituto legatum sit relictum, quamdiu institutus deliberat defuncto legatario non nocebit, si postea heres institutus repudiavit: nam ad heredem suum transtulit petitionem. 4Tantundem et si ab impuberis substituto legetur: nam ad heredem suum legatum transfert. 5Tractari tamen potest, si impuberi substitutus damnatus sit, si intra pubertatem filius decesserit, Seio centum dare, an vivo pupillo defunctus Seius ad heredem transferat, quasi ea condicio sit expressa, quae inerat. et magis est ad heredem legatarii transire. 6Interdum aditio heredis legatis moram facit, ut puta si forte servo manumisso vel ei cui servus legatus est et ideo servo aliquid legatum sit: nam servo legati relicti ante aditam hereditatem dies non cedit.
7 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XX. The acceptance of the estate by the heir causes the claim for the legacy to be deferred, but does not prevent it from taking effect. 1Hence, whether an heir who was appointed absolutely defers his acceptance of the estate, or, whether, if he was appointed conditionally, he is prevented from accepting it by the condition, the rights of the legatee will be protected. 2If, however, an unborn heir, or a person who is in the hands of the enemy is appointed, in like manner, the rights of the legatee will not be prejudiced, because his legacy has begun to take effect. 3For this reason we say that where a substitute has been charged with a legacy, the legacy will not be affected, if, while the appointed heir is deliberating, the legatee should die; for his rights will not be prejudiced even if the appointed heir should afterwards reject the estate, since the legatee will transmit his claim to his own heir. 4The case is the same where a substitute for a minor is charged with a legacy, for he also will transmit the legacy to his heir. 5If the substitute of a minor is charged to pay a hundred aurei to Seius, and the son should die before reaching the age of puberty; it might be a subject of discussion whether, if Seius should die during the lifetime of the minor, he would transmit the legacy to his heir, just as if the condition upon which the legacy depended had been expressed. The better opinion is that the legacy will pass to the heir. 6Sometimes the acceptance of the estate having been postponed by the heir, it causes the vesting of the legacies also to be postponed; as, for instance, where a slave is manumitted, or is left to someone, and a bequest is made to the slave on this account; for where a legacy is bequeathed to a slave, it never takes effect until the estate has been entered upon.
8 Idem libro vicesimo quarto ad Sabinum. Nam cum libertas non prius competat quam adita hereditate, aequissimum visum est nec legati diem ante cedere: alioquin inutile fieret legatum, si dies eius cessisset antequam libertas competeret. quod evenit, si servo pure legetur et liber esse sub condicione iubeatur et pendens condicio inveniatur et post aditam hereditatem.
8 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXIV. For as the slave is not entitled to his freedom before the estate has been accepted, it seems to be perfectly just that the legacy should not take effect before that time, otherwise, it would be void if it should become operative before the slave obtained his freedom, and this would be the case where a bequest was made absolutely to the slave, and he was ordered to be free under a certain condition, and the condition is ascertained to be pending after the estate has been entered upon.
9 Idem libro vicensimo primo ad Sabinum. Si habitatio filio familias vel servo legata sit, puto non adquiri domino vel patri legatum, si ante aditam hereditatem filius vel servus decesserit: nam cum personae cohaereat, recte dicitur ante aditam hereditatem diem non cedere.
9 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXI. Where a right of habitation is bequeathed to a son under paternal control, or to a slave, I do not think that the legacy will be acquired by the master or the father, if the son of the slave should die before the estate is accepted; for, as the legacy attaches to the person, it is very properly held that it does not take effect before the estate has been entered upon.
10 Idem libro vicesimo tertio ad Sabinum. Cum in annos singulos legatur, non unum legatum esse, sed plura constat.
10 The Same, On Sabinus, Book XXIII. Where a legacy is bequeathed to be paid annually, it is evident that this is not one legacy, but several.
11 Iulianus libro trigesimo septimo digestorum. (nec refert, singuli aurei in annos singulos legentur an in annum primum mille aurei, in secundum homo, in tertium frumentum)
11 Julianus, Digest, Book XXXVII. It makes no difference whether so many aurei are payable every year, or the sum of a thousand aurei is to be paid at the end of the first year, and a slave is to be delivered at the end of the second, and grain at the end of the third.
12 Ulpianus libro vicesimo tertio ad Sabinum. nec semel diem eius cedere, sed per singulos annos. 1Sed utrum initio cuiusque anni an vero finito anno cedat, quaestionis fuit. et Labeo Sabinus et Celsus et Cassius et Iulianus in omnibus, quae in annos singulos relinquuntur, hoc probaverunt, ut initio cuiusque anni huius legati dies cederet. 2Inde Iulianus ait, hoc legatum si servo relinquatur, deinde post primum vel alterum annum sit liber, sibi eum adquirere. 3Item Celsus scribit, quod et Iulianus probat, huius legati diem ex die mortis cedere, non ex quo adita est hereditas, et si forte post multos annos adeatur hereditas, omnium annorum legatario deberi. 4Sed et si quotannis sit legatum, mihi videtur etiam in hoc initium cuiusque anni spectandum, nisi forte evidens sit voluntas testatoris in annuas pensiones ideo dividentis, quoniam non legatario consultum, sed heredi prospectum voluit, ne urgueretur ad solutionem. 5Si in habitationem aliquid vel in disciplinam legetur sic ‘annua’ vel ‘quotannis’, quibus diebus pensio debetur habitationis vel merces disciplinarum, isdem intellegitur legatum relictum, coniectura voluntatis facta. 6Novissime Pomponius scribit nihil interesse, utrum ‘in annos singulos’ vel ‘quotannis’ an ‘in singulos menses’ vel ‘quot mensibus’ an ‘in singulos dies’ vel ‘quot diebus’ legetur. ipse quoque huic sententiae accedo: proinde et si ‘annui’ legentur tot aurei, idem erit dicendum. 7Si cui homo generaliter sit legatus et antequam vindicet decesserit, ad heredem suum legatum transfert. 8Si Titio sit sic legatum ‘quem Seius elegerit’ et Seius post electionem decesserit, locus est vindicationi semel adquisitae.
12 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XXIII. Legacies of this kind are not merely payable once, but are payable annually. 1The question arose whether such legacies were payable at the beginning, or at the end of every year. Labeo, Sabinus, Celsus, Cassius, and Julianus all were of the opinion that a legacy of this kind was payable at the beginning of every year. 2Hence Julianus says that where a legacy of this kind is bequeathed to a slave, and he becomes free after the first or second year, he will acquire the legacy. 3Celsus also says, and Julianus agrees with him, that such a legacy takes effect from the day of the death of the testator, and not from that on which the estate was accepted, and that if the estate should be entered upon after the lapse of several years, the legatee will be entitled to the legacy for all those years. 4Where, however, a legacy payable annually is bequeathed, it seems to me that the beginning of every year should be understood also in this instance; unless it is clear that the intention of the testator, in dividing the legacy into annual payments, was rather to benefit the heir than the legatee, in order that he might not be compelled to pay the entire amount at once. 5Where a sum payable annually or every year was bequeathed to provide a lodging, or instruction, the conjecture of the will of the testator in making the bequest is that it will be payable at the time when the rent of the lodging, or the price of the instruction, is due. 6In conclusion, Pomponius stated that it made no difference whether the legacy was payable every year, or annually; or every month, or monthly; or every day, or daily. I myself also adopt this opinion. Hence the same rule will apply where a certain sum of aurei payable annually is bequeathed. 7Where a slave is bequeathed in general terms, and the legatee dies before claiming the slave, he transmits the legacy to his heir. 8If a legacy is bequeathed to Titius as follows, “The slave whom Seius may select,” and Seius should die after making his choice, there is ground for the recovery of the slave who has once been acquired by the legatee.
13 Pomponius libro sexto ad Sabinum. Huiusmodi legatum: ‘sive illud factum fuerit sive non fuerit, illi do lego’, ad heredem non transit, nisi alter casus vivo legatario exstiterit, quoniam causa, ex qua debeatur, praecedere semper debet. nec, quia certum est alterutrum futurum, omnimodo debebitur: nam tale legatum: ‘cum morietur, heres dato’ certum est debitum iri et tamen ad heredem legatarii non transit, si vivo herede decedat.
13 Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book VI. Where a legacy is bequeathed in the following terms, “I give and bequeath to So-and-So such-and-such an article, whether it has been made or not,” the legacy does not pass to the heir, unless one or the other of the conditions has been fulfilled during the lifetime of the legatee; as the reason for which a legacy is due must always precede it, and not because it is certain that one or the other of two things will take place, and that the legacy will be due under all circumstances; for where a legacy is bequeathed as follows, “Let my heir give such-and-such property when he dies,” it is certain that the legacy will be due, and still it does not pass to the successor of the legatee, if the latter should die during the lifetime of the heir.
14 Ulpianus libro vicesimo quarto ad Sabinum. Si usus fructus aut decem, utrum legatarius voluerit, sint legata, utrumque spectandum et mortem testatoris et aditionem hereditatis, mortem propter decem, aditionem propter usum fructum: quamvis enim electio sit legatarii, tamen nondum electioni locus esse potest, cum proponatur aut nondum testatorem decessisse aut eo mortuo hereditas nondum adita. 1Inde quaerit Iulianus, si post mortem testatoris legatarius decedat, an ad heredem transferat decem legatum, et libro trigensimo septimo digestorum scribit posse dici decem transtulisse, quia mortuo legatario dies legati cedit. argumentum Iulianus pro sententia sua adfert tale: ‘Seiae decem aut, si pepererit, fundum heres meus dato’: nam si, antequam pariat, inquit, decesserit, ad heredem suum decem transmittet. 2Si ita quis legaverit filio familias, ut ipsi solvatur, potest procedere legatum nec imputari heredi, cur non patri, sed potius filio solvat: finge enim hoc nominatim expressum ‘ita ut filio solvat’: certe si pater petat, exceptione erit repellendus. 3Si dies legati cesserit, deinde legatarius in ius alienum pervenit, ipsi potius debetur legatum, in cuius ipse ius pervenit: transeunt enim cum eo, quae ei debebantur. sed si sub condicione fuerit legatum, non transit, sed exspectabit condicionem eique adquiretur, cuius iuris erit condicionis existentis tempore: quod si sui iuris fuerit eo tempore, sibi potius adquiret.
14 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XXIV. Where “The usufruct of certain property, or the sum of ten aurei, whichever the legatee may select,” is bequeathed, both the time of the death of the testator and that of the acceptance of the estate must be taken into consideration; the date of the death on account of the payment of the ten aurei, and that of the acceptance of the estate because of the usufruct. For, although the legatee has the right of choice, still, the selection cannot at once take effect, as it is supposed that the testator has not yet died, or if he has died, that his estate has not yet been entered upon. 1Therefore, Julianus asks, if the legatee should die after the death of the testator, whether the legacy of the ten aurei will pass to the heir. He says, in the Thirty-seventh Book of the Digest, that the ten aurei may be considered to have been transmitted to him, because the legacy begins to vest at the time of the death of the legatee. Julianus gives the following example in support of his opinion, “Let my heir pay ten aurei to Seia; if she has a child let him convey to her such-and-such a tract of land,” for he holds that if she should die before having a child, she will transmit the ten aurei to her heir. 2If anyone should make a bequest to a son under paternal control and charge him to pay himself, the legacy will stand, and the heir will not be to blame for paying it to the son, rather than to the father; for suppose, for instance, that he had been especially directed to pay the son. It is certain that if the father brings suit to recover the legacy, he should be barred by an exception. 3If, after the legacy takes effect, the legatee should be subjected to the control of another, the legacy will be due to the person under whose authority he has passed, for everything to which he is entitled is transferred with him. If, however, the legacy was bequeathed under a condition, it will not pass, but its delivery will be deferred until the condition has been fulfilled; and it will be acquired by the person under whose control the legatee was at the time when the condition was complied with. If the legatee should be his own master at that time, he himself will acquire the legacy.
15 Idem libro quinto disputationum. Si ita esset liberis fideicommissum relictum, si morte patris sui iuris essent effecti, nec mortalitate patris, sed emancipatione patres familiarum constituti sint, deberi eis fideicommissum nemo dubitaverit diemque eius emancipatione cessisse, qui morte patris cederet.
15 The Same, Disputations, Book V. Where a trust is left to children, “If they should become their own masters by the death of their father,” and they become independent, not through his death, but through emancipation by him, no one can doubt that they will be entitled to the benefit of the trust, and that the legacy which would have taken effect at the death of their father will vest from the time of their emancipation.
16 Iulianus libro trigensimo quinto digestorum. Cum ita legatum est: ‘Stichum vel quod ex Pamphila natum erit heres meus dato’, non ante legati eius cedet, quam aliquid ex Pamphila natum fuerit aut certum fuerit nasci non posse. 1Cum servo legato, antequam hereditas eius qui legaverat adiretur, usus fructus ab alio legatus fuerit et prior hereditas eius, qui usum fructum legaverit, adita fuerit: nulla ratio est, cur diem legati cedere existimemus, antequam ea quoque hereditas, ex qua servus legatus erat, adeatur, cum neque in praesentia ullum emolumentum hereditati adquiratur et, si interim servus mortuus fuerit, legatum extinguatur. quare adita hereditate existimandum est usum fructum ad eum, cuius servus legatus esset, pertinere. 2Quod si servus, cui usus fructus legatus fuerit, ipse legatus non fuerit, dicendum est usum fructum ad hereditatem pertinere, eo quod dies eius ante aditam hereditatem non cesserit.
16 Julianus, Digest, Book XXXV. Where a legacy is bequeathed in the following terms, “Let my heir give Stichus, or any children born to Pamphila,” the legacy will not be payable before the day when Pamphila has a child, or at a time when it will be certain that a child will not be born to her. 1Where an usufruct is bequeathed by anyone to a slave, who was himself bequeathed by his master before the estate of the latter has been entered upon, and also before the estate of him who left the usufruct has been accepted, we think that there is no reason why the legacy should begin to take effect before the estate to which the slave who was bequeathed belonged is entered upon, as no advantage will at present accrue to the estate, and if in the meantime the slave should die, the legacy will be extinguished. Therefore, it must be held that as soon as the estate has been entered upon, the usufruct must be considered to belong to the person whose slave was bequeathed. 2If the slave to whom the usufruct was left should not himself have been bequeathed, it must be said that the usufruct will belong to the estate, because the time for it to take effect did not arrive before the estate was accepted.
17 Idem libro trigensimo sexto digestorum. Cum legato servo aliquid legatur, dies eius legati quod servo datur non mortis tempore, sed aditae hereditatis cedit: et ideo impedimento non est regula iuris, quo minus manumisso legatum debeatur, quia etsi confestim pater familias moreretur, non in eiusdem personam et emolumentum legati et obligatio iuris concurreret. perinde igitur est hoc, de quo quaeritur, ac si filio herede instituto patri legatum esset: quod consistere intellegitur eo, quod, quamvis statim pater familias moriatur, potest emancipatus adire hereditatem, ut patri legatum debeat.
17 The Same, Digest, Book XXXVI. Where a legacy is left to a slave who is himself bequeathed, the legacy does not take effect at the time of the death of the testator, but at the time when the estate is entered upon; and hence the rule of law under which a legacy is not permitted to be given to a slave, even if he is manumitted, cannot be cited in opposition; for even if the testator should die immediately, the benefit of the legacy and the obligation of the law to pay the same are not concurrent in the person of the same individual. Therefore, the question under discussion is exactly the same as if a bequest had been made to a father, after his son had been appointed the heir of the testator; because it is understood that even if the father should die immediately, his son, having been emancipated, could enter upon the estate just as if he owed the legacy to his father.
18 Idem libro trigensimo septimo digestorum. Is cui ita legatum est ‘quandoque liberos habuerit’ si praegnate uxore relicta decesserit, intellegitur expleta condicione decessisse et legatum valere, si tamen postumus natus fuerit.
18 The Same, Digest, Book XXXVII. Where a legacy is bequeathed to any one as follows, “When he shall have children,” and he dies leaving his wife pregnant, it is understood that the condition was complied with at the time of his death, and the legacy will be valid, provided a posthumous child should be born.
19 Idem libro septuagensimo digestorum. Cum sine praefinitione temporis legatum ita datum fuerit: ‘uxori meae penum heres dato: si non dederit, centum dato’, unum legatum intellegitur centum et statim peti potest, penoris autem causa eo tantum pertinet, ut ante litem contestatam tradita peno heres liberetur. 1Quod si ita scriptum sit ‘si penum intra kalendas non dederit, centum dato’, non efficitur, ut duo legata sint, sed ut centum legata sub condicione videantur: idcirco si uxor ante kalendas decesserit, heredi suo neque penum relinquet, quia legata non est, neque centum, quia dies legati cesserit necesse est legataria viva. 2Statim dies mihi cedit, cum ab eo mihi fideicommissum datum est, cui sub condicione legatum est, quemadmodum si herede instituto sub condicione pure mihi legetur. 3Si debitori quod sub condicione debet legatum est, praesens legatum est agique ex testamento statim potest, ut liberatio praestetur, et, si post mortem testatoris decesserit, ad heredem transmittit actionem. 4Haec dicenda erunt et si non ipsi debitori, sed alii cuilibet similiter legatum esse proponatur.
19 The Same, Digest, Book LXX. Where a legacy is bequeathed without prescribing any time, as follows, “Let my heir provide my wife with provisions for her support, and if he does not do so, let him pay her a hundred aurei,” the legacy is understood to be only one of a hundred aurei, and it can be claimed at once. The statement relative to provisions has no other effect than to release the heir from liability, if they are delivered before issue has been joined in the case. 1Where the following provision was inserted into a will, namely, “If he should not furnish my wife with provisions before the Kalends of such-and-such a month, let him pay her a hundred aurei,” it is held that the result is not that there have been two legacies created, but that a hundred aurei were bequeathed to her under a condition. Hence if the wife should die before the Kalends of the month designated, she will not leave the provisions to her heir, because they have not been bequeathed; nor will she leave him a hundred aurei, because the day for the payment of the legacy has not arrived. 2Where a legacy is bequeathed under a condition to someone who is charged with a trust for my benefit, it is just as if the legacy was bequeathed to me absolutely, and the heir was appointed under a condition. 3Where a legacy of the amount which he owes is bequeathed to a debtor it is payable immediately, and an action can at once be brought under the will to obtain a release; and if the debtor should die after the death of the testator, he will transmit his right of action to his heir. 4The same rule will apply where a legacy is left in the same manner, not to the debtor himself, but to someone else.
20 Marcianus libro sexto institutionum. Si cum praefinitione annorum legatum fuerit, veluti ‘Titio dena usque ad annos decem’, Iulianus libro trigensimo digestorum scribit interesse: et si quidem alimentorum nomine legatum fuerit, plura esse legata et futurorum annorum legatum legatarium mortuum ad heredem non transmittere: si vero non pro alimentis legavit, sed in plures pensiones divisit exonerandi heredis gratia, hoc casu ait omnium annorum unum esse legatum et intra decennium decedentem legatarium etiam futurorum annorum legatum ad heredem suum transmittere: quae sententia vera est.
20 Marcianus, Institutes, Book VI. Where a legacy is bequeathed for a prescribed number of years, for instance, the sum of ten aurei is left to Titius payable annually for ten years, Julianus, in the Thirteenth Book of the Digest, says that a distinction must be made; for if the legacy is bequeathed for the purpose of support, there are several distinct legacies, and if the legatee should die he will not transmit to his heir those which are payable in years to come. If, however, the testator did not bequeath the legacy in order to provide support, but divided it into several payments for the convenience of the heir, in this instance, he says that the sums payable in future years will constitute but a single bequest, and if the legatee should die within ten years, he will transmit to his heir the amounts due for the ensuing time. This opinion is correct.
21 Paulus libro secundo ad Vitellium. Si dies adposita legato non est, praesens debetur aut confestim ad eum pertinet cui datum est: adiecta quamvis longa sit, si certa est, veluti kalendis Ianuariis centesimis, dies quidem legati statim cedit, sed ante diem peti non potest: at si incerta, quasi ‘cum pubes erit’ ‘cum in familiam nupserit’ ‘cum magistratum inierit’ cum aliquid demum, quod scribenti comprehendere sit commodum, fecerit: nisi tempus condiciove optigit, neque res pertinere neque dies legati cedere potest. 1Si sub condicione, qua te heredem institui, sub ea condicione Titio legatum sit, Pomponius putat perinde huius legati diem cedere atque si pure relictum esset, quoniam certum esset herede existente debitum iri: neque enim per condicionem heredum fieri incerta legata nec multum interesse tale legatum ab hoc ‘si heres erit, dato’.
21 Paulus, On Vitellius, Book II. If a day is not fixed for the payment of a legacy, it will be payable at once, or it belongs immediately to the person to whom it was given. Where a term is prescribed, even though it may be a long one, provided it is certain (as, for instance, after a hundred Kalends of January), the legacy vests immediately on the death of the testator, but it cannot be collected before the time which was fixed arrives. If, however, the time is uncertain (for example, when the boy arrives at puberty, or when he marries into my family, or when he obtains the office of magistrate, or finally, when he does something which it suited the testator to insert into his will), if the time does not arrive, or the condition take place, the property will not belong to the legatee, nor can the legacy take effect. 1Where a bequest is made to Titius subject to the same condition under which I have appointed you my heir, Pomponius thinks that the legacy will begin to take effect just as if it had been left absolutely, as it is certain that it will be payable whenever there is an heir; for a legacy does not become uncertain on account of a condition that there shall be an heir, since a bequest of this kind does not differ greatly from one dependent upon the following condition, “Let payment be made to him, if he should become my heir.”
22 Pomponius libro quinto ad Quintum Mucium. Si Titio, ‘cum is annorum quattuordecim esset factus’, legatum fuerit et is ante quartum decimum annum decesserit, verum est ad heredem eius legatum non transire, quoniam non solum diem, sed et condicionem hoc legatum in se continet ‘si effectus esset annorum quattuordecim’, qui autem in rerum natura non esset, annorum quattuordecim esse non intellegeretur. nec interest, utrum scribatur ‘si annorum quattuordecim factus erit’ an ita cum priore scriptura per condicionem tempus demonstratur, sequenti per tempus condicio, utrubique tamen eadem condicio est. 1Quaedam autem condiciones etiam supervacuae sunt, veluti si ita scribat: ‘Titius heres esto. si Titius hereditatem meam adierit, Maevio decem dato’: nam pro non scripto ea condicio erit, ut omnimodo ad heredem Maevii legatum transeat, etiamsi Maevius ante aditam hereditatem decesserit. et idem, si ita fuerit scriptum: ‘si Titius hereditatem meam adierit, intra dies centum Maevio decem dato’: nam hoc legatum in diem erit, non sub condicione, quia definitio Labeonis probanda est dicentis id demum legatum ad heredem legatarii transire, quod certum sit debitum iri, si adeatur hereditas. 2Si tamen duos heredes instituam et, si alter ex his adeat hereditatem, alicui legem ab omnibus heredibus: non erit pro supervacuo ea condicio, sed in portionem quidem coheredis valebit, in ipsius autem, cuius persona in condicione comprehensa est, supervacua erit, perinde atque si solo eo herede instituto eo modo legatum esset.
22 Pomponius, On Quintus Mucius, Book V. If a legacy should be made to Titius, payable when he reaches the age of fourteen years, and he dies before attaining his fourteenth year, it is true that the legacy will not pass to his heir, as it includes not only the time but also the condition under which it will take effect; that is to say, when the legatee reaches the age of fourteen years. Moreover, anyone who is not in existence cannot be understood to be fourteen years old. Nor does it make any difference whether the following clause, “If he should reach the age of fourteen years,” is inserted; as, in the first instance, the time is indicated by the condition, and in the second, the condition is indicated by the time, since the same condition applies to both. 1Again, some conditions are superfluous, as for example, if a testator should say, “Let Titius be my heir, and if he enters upon my estate, let him pay ten aurei to Mævius.” This condition is considered not to have been written, as the legacy will pass to the heir of Mævius, even if the latter should die before the estate was accepted. The rule will be the same where it is written, “If Titius enters upon my estate, let him pay Mævius ten aurei within a hundred days.” For this legacy was payable within a certain time, and not under a condition, and the rule of Labeo, who says that a legacy will pass to the heir of the legatee when it is certain that it will be payable if the estate is entered upon, should be adopted. 2Still, if I appoint two heirs, and charge both of them with a trust for the benefit of someone, if either should accept the estate, this condition will not be considered superfluous, but will be valid so far as the share of the co-heir is concerned; but it will be void with reference to the person to whom the condition relates, just as if the legacy had been bequeathed in the same way after the appointment of a single heir.
23 Ulpianus libro quarto ad legem Iuliam et Papiam. Cum in annos singulos legatum relinquitur, sine dubio per annos singulos inspecta condicione legatarii aut capere. et si plurium servus sit, singulorum dominorum erunt personae spectandae.
23 Ulpianus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. Where a legacy is bequeathed payable every year, it is said that there is no doubt that the condition of the legatee should be investigated every year, to determine whether he is capable of receiving it; and if he is a slave belonging to several masters, the condition of the different masters must be investigated.
24 Paulus libro sexto ad legem Iuliam et Papiam. Si penum heres dare damnatus sit vel fundum et, si non dedisset, decem, ego accepi et penum legatam et translatam esse in decem, si noluerit penum heres dare, et tunc pecuniam deberi, cum interpellatus fundum non dedisset, et, si interea decesserit legatarius, tunc heredi eius non nisi fundum deberi. namque cum dictum est: ‘at Publicius fundum dato’, perfectum est legatum et cum dicit: ‘si non dederit, centum dato’, sub condicione fundi legatum ademptum videri eo casu, quo centum deberi coeperint. quorum quia condicio vivo legatario non exstiterit, forte quia interpellatus heres non sit, evenit, ut ademptio nihil egerit fundique legatum duraverit. 1Plane si sic legatum sit: ‘si penum non dederit, decem dato’, dicimus non esse penum legatum.
24 Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book VI. Where an heir is charged with the delivery of provisions or land, and, if he should not deliver them, is required to pay ten aurei; and I have ascertained that the provisions which were the subject of the legacy have been changed into the sum of ten aurei, and if the heir refuses to deliver the provisions, the money will then be payable; and if, when notified to deliver the land, the heir does not do so, and, in the meantime he should die, his heir will not be entitled to anything but the land. For when anyone says, “Let my heir Publicius transfer such-and-such a tract of land,” the legacy is complete, and if he should add, “If he does not transfer it, let him pay a hundred aurei,” the legatee seems to have been deprived of the devise of the land on condition that the hundred aurei will begin to be due; and if the condition should not be fulfilled during the lifetime of the legatee, for instance, because no demand was made upon the heir, the result will be that the deprivation of the legacy will be of no force or effect, and the devise of the land will remain. 1When a bequest is made as follows, “If my heir should not furnish the provisions, let him pay ten aurei,” we hold that it is clear that no provisions have been bequeathed.
25 Papinianus libro octavo decimo quaestionum. Cum illud aut illud legetur, enumeratio plurium rerum disiunctivo modo comprehensa plura legata non facit. nec aliud probari poterit, si pure fundum alterum vel alterum sub condicione legaverit: nam pendente condicione non erit electio nec, si moriatur, ad heredem transisse legatum videbitur. 1‘Heres meus Titio dato quod mihi Seius debet’. si Seius pupillus sine tutoris auctoritate nummos accepit nec locupletior factus est et creditor ad praesens debitum verba rettulit, quia nihil Seius debet, nullius momenti legatum erit: quod si verbo debiti naturalem obligationem et futuram solutionem cogitavit, interim nihil Titius petet, quasi tacite condicio inserta sit, non secus ac si ita dixisset: ‘Titio dato, quod pupillus solverit’ vel si legasset ‘quod ex Arethusa natum erit’ vel ‘fructus, qui in illo fundo nascentur’. contrarium non est, quod, si medio tempore legatarius moriatur et postea partus edatur, fructus perveniant, pecuniam pupillus exsolvat, heres legatarii petitionem habet: namque dies legati, cui condicio non adscribitur, quamvis extrinsecus exspectanda sit, cedit.
25 Papinianus, Questions, Book XVIII. Where such-and-such an article, or such-and-such a piece of property is bequeathed, the enumeration of the different articles included in a disjunctive clause does not constitute several legacies. Nor can a different opinion be held if the testator should devise one tract of land absolutely, and another conditionally; for while the condition is pending, no choice can be made, and if the devisee should die, the devise will not be considered to have passed to his heir. 1“Let my heir pay Titius what Seius owes me.” If the ward, Seius, had borrowed a sum of money without the authority of his guardian, and did not become more wealthy on this account, and the testator had reference to this debt, as the ward did not owe him anything, the legacy will have no force or effect. If, however, the testator by the term “debt” had reference to the natural obligation incurred and to future payment, Titius can claim nothing; as the condition was tacitly imposed, and it is just the same as if the testator had said, “Let my heir pay Titius whatever the ward may pay,” or, if he should bequeath any children who may be born to the slave Arathusa, or any crops which may be obtained from the said tract of land. If, in the meantime, the legatee should die, and the female slave should afterwards have a child, or crops should be gathered, or the ward should pay the money which was due, the heir of the legatee will be entitled to assert his claim; and this is not contrary to what has been already stated, for a legacy vests where a condition is not imposed, even though this is due to some external cause.
26 Idem libro nono responsorum. ‘Firmio Heliodoro fratri meo dari volo quinquaginta ex reditu praediorum meorum futuri anni postea’. non videri condicionem additam, sed tempus solvendae pecuniae prolatum videri respondi: fructibus fini relictae pecuniae non perceptis ubertatem esse necessariam anni secundi. 1Cum ab heredibus alumno centum dari voluisset testator et eam pecuniam ad alium transferri, ut in annum vicensimum quintum trientes usuras eius summae perciperet alumnus ac post eam aetatem sortem ipsam: intra vicensimum quintum annum eo defuncto transmissum ad heredem pueri fideicommissum respondi: nam certam aetatem sorti solvendae praestitutam videri, non pure fideicommisso relicto condicionem insertam. cum autem fideicommissum ab eo peti non posset, penes quem voluit pecuniam collocari, propter haec verba ‘eamque alumno meo post aetatem supra scriptam curabis reddere’ fideicommissum ab heredibus petendum, qui pecuniam dari stipulari debuerunt: sed fideiussores ab eo non petendos, cuius fidem sequi defunctus maluit. 2Pater annua tot ex fructu bonorum, quem uxori legavit, accessura filii patrimonio praeter exhibitionem, quam aeque matri mandavit, ad annum aetatis eius vicensimum quintum ab uxore praestari voluit. non plura, sed unum esse fideicommissum certis pensionibus divisum apparuit et ideo filio intra aetatem supra scriptam diem functo residui temporis ad heredem fideicommissum eius transmitti, sed non initio cuiusque anni peti pecuniam oportere, quod ex fructibus uxori datis pater filio praeberi voluit. ceterum si pecuniam annuam pater alimentis filii destinasset, non dubie persona deficiente causa praestandi videtur extincta.
26 The Same, Opinions, Book IX. “I desire fifty aurei out of the income of my lands collected during the year after my death to be paid to my brother, Firmius Heliodbrus.” It was my opinion that the legacy was subject to no condition, but that the time of the payment of the money seemed to have been prolonged; and if the income of the land for the present year should be insufficient to make up the sum bequeathed, recourse must be had to the income of the following year. 1A testator desired a hundred aurei to be paid by his heirs to his foster-child, and that the said sum of money should be paid to a third party, so that the foster-child might receive the interest on the same at the rate of four per cent per annum, until he reached his twenty-fifth year; and then that he should be paid the principal. The said child having died before reaching his twenty-fifth year, I gave it as my opinion that the benefit of the trust was transmitted to his heir. For no condition seemed to be attached to the payment of the principal, except that it should be made when the beneficiary reached a certain age; and as the heir could not demand the execution of the trust from the third party aforesaid, with whom the testator desired the money to be deposited, because, on account of the following provision, “You will, without fail, pay the said sum of money to my foster-child, after he reaches the age above mentioned,” the execution of the trust must be demanded of the heirs of the testator, who ought to stipulate for the payment of the money; as a person in whom the deceased reposed confidence cannot be required to furnish sureties by the heir of the beneficiary. 2A father charged his wife, to whom he had bequeathed certain property, to pay to his son until he reached the age of twenty-five years a certain sum of money annually out of the income of said property, which was to form part of the estate of his son, in addition to the support of the latter which has been provided for. It appeared that there were not several trusts in this case, but one trust divided into several payments, and therefore the son, having died before reaching the aforesaid age, transmitted the trust for the remaining time to his heir; but the latter could not demand the payment of the money at the beginning of every year, because the father intended it should be paid to the son out of the income of the property given to the wife. Moreover, if the father intended the money, which was payable annually, to be used for the support of the son, there is no doubt that, after the death of the latter, the reason for paying it no longer existed.
27 Scaevola libro tertio responsorum. Filium familias ex parte pure instituit heredem eique fideicommissum dedit et eodem testamento ita cavit: ‘quod ego Lucium Titium heredem institui, ita eum adire hereditatem volo, si is patria potestate liberatus fuerit’: quaesitum est, an a coheredibus eius adita hereditate legati filio familias dati dies cesserit. respondit, si pure sit datum, a coherede filii pro hereditaria parte fideicommissum peti posse. 1Menstruos denarios denos manumissis legavit: quaesitum est, cum absentibus heredibus ex senatus consulto libertatem sunt consecuti, ex quo tempore eis cibaria debeantur. respondit secundum ea quae proponerentur ex eo tempore his cibaria debeantur, quo liberi esse coeperint.
27 Scævola, Opinions, Book III. A testator appointed a son under paternal authority the unconditional heir to a portion of his estate, charged him with a trust, and inserted the following provision into his will, “For the reason that I have appointed Lucius Titius my heir, I wish him to enter upon my estate, if he should be released from the control of his father.” After the estate had been accepted by his co-heirs, the question arose whether the legacy left to the son would take effect. The answer was that if it was left without any condition, the execution of the trust could be demanded of the co-heirs of the son, in proportion to their respective shares in the estate. 1A testator left ten denarii payable monthly to certain slaves whom he manumitted. As the heirs were absent, and the slaves obtained their freedom under the Decree of the Senate, the question arose from what time the payment of legacies for their support should be made. The answer was that, according to the facts stated, these legacies should be paid to them from the time when they began to be free.
28 Idem libro quarto responsorum. Si fundus instructus relictus erit, quaeritur, quemadmodum dari debeat, utrum sicut instructus fuit mortis tempore an eo tempore quo facti sunt codicilli an quo peti coepit. respondit ea quibus instructus sit fundus, cum dies legati cedat, deberi.
28 The Same, Opinions, Book IV. When a tract of land, with all its equipment, is devised, the question arises in what way it should be delivered, whether in the condition it was at the time of the death of the testator, or at the time when the codicil was made, or at the time when it was claimed. The answer was that the land with its equipment should be delivered at the time when the legacy vested.
29 Valens libro primo fideicommissorum. ‘Rogo, quandoque heres meus Titio decem det’: utique decem heres debebit, sed quando, dubitari potest: utrum cum primum potuerit, et dies cedit et ab ipso petitur.
29 Valens, Trusts, Book I. “I charge my heir to pay to Titius ten aurei at some time or other.” There is no doubt that the heir owes ten aurei, but it is uncertain when he owes them. It seems that the legacy will take effect, and can be demanded of the heir as soon as he is able to pay it.
30 Labeo libro tertio posteriorum a Iavoleno epitomatorum. Quod pupillae legatum est ‘quandoque nupserit’, si ea minor quam viripotens nupserit, non ante ei legatum debebitur, quam viripotens esse coeperit, quia non potest videri nupta, quae virum pati non potest.
30 Labeo, Epitomes of the Last Works of Javolenus, Book III. Where a legacy is bequeathed to a female ward, to take effect when she marries, and she should marry before being nubile, she will not be entitled to the legacy before she reaches the marriageable age; because a girl cannot be considered to be married when she is incapable of cohabitation.
31 Scaevola libro quarto decimo digestorum. Uxori ex parte sextante heredi institutae substituit et heredem fidei commisit, si uxor heres non erit, dotem ei et alia quaedam dari: post mortem mariti uxor ante condicionem et priusquam adeat hereditatem decessit. quaesitum est, an dies fideicommissi cum moritur cessisse videatur ideoque heredibus eius debeatur. respondi, si uxor prius decessit, quam hereditatem adiret, videri diem fideicommissi cessisse.
31 Scævola, Digest, Book XIV. A certain man having appointed his wife heir to a sixth part of his estate appointed a substitute for her, and charged his heirs by a trust, if his wife should not be his heir, to give her her dowry and certain other property; and the husband having died, the wife died also before the condition was complied with, and before she had entered upon the estate. The question arose whether the trust took effect at the time of her death, and whether her heirs were entitled to the benefit of it. I answered that if the wife died before entering upon the estate, they were entitled to the benefit of the trust from the time of her death.