Epistularum libri
Ex libro XIV
Dig. 35,1,56Idem libro quarto decimo epistularum. Cui fundus legatus est, si decem dederit, partem fundi consequi non potest, nisi totam pecuniam numerasset. dissimilis est causa, cum duobus eadem res sub condicione legata est: in hac enim quaestione statim a testamento, quo pluribus condicio adposita est, divisa quoque in singulas personas videri potest, et ideo singuli pro sua parte et condicioni parere et legatum capere possunt: nam quamvis summa universe condicionis sit adscripta, enumeratione personarum potest videri esse divisa. in eo vero, quod uni sub condicione legatum est, scindi ex accidenti condicio non debet, et omnis numerus eorum, qui in locum eius substituuntur, pro singulari persona est habendus.
The Same, Epistles, Book XIV. Where an estate is left to anyone on condition of his paying ten aurei, the devisee cannot obtain any portion of the land without paying the entire amount. The case, however, is different where the identical property is left to two persons under the same condition, for in this instance, under the terms of the will, the condition imposed upon the different parties may appear to have been divided among them separately, and therefore they can, as individuals, comply with it in proportion to their respective shares, and receive the legacy. For although the entire sum, on the payment of which the legacy is dependent, seems to be divided by the enumeration of the different persons, the condition cannot be divided where some accidental occurrence takes place, in the case where the legacy is left to one person conditionally, and the entire number of those who are substituted for the legatee should be considered as constituting but one individual.
Dig. 41,2,24Idem libro quarto decimo epistularum. Quod servus tuus ignorante te vi possidet, id tu non possides, quoniam is, qui in tua potestate est, ignoranti tibi non corporalem possessionem, sed iustam potest adquirere: sicut id, quod ex peculio ad eum pervenerit, possidet. nam tum per servum dominus quoque possidere dicitur, summa scilicet cum ratione, quia, quod ex iusta causa corporaliter a servo tenetur, id in peculio servi est et peculium, quod servus civiliter quidem possidere non posset, sed naturaliter tenet, dominus creditur possidere. quod vero ex maleficiis adprehenditur, id ad domini possessionem ideo non pertinet, quia nec peculii causam adprehendit.
The Same, Epistles, Book XIV. Anything that your slave obtains possession of by violence, without your knowledge, you do not possess, because he who is under your control cannot acquire corporeal possession if you are not aware of it; but he can acquire legal possession, as, for instance, he possesses what comes into his hands as part of his peculium. For when a master is said to possess by his slave, there is an excellent reason for this, because what is held by the slave actually, and for a good reason belongs to his peculium, and the peculium which a slave cannot possess as a citizen, but holds naturally, his master is considered to possess. Anything, however, which the slave acquires by illegal acts, is not possessed by the master, because it is not included in the peculium of the slave.
Dig. 45,3,36Iavolenus libro quarto decimo epistularum. Quod servus stipulatus est, quem dominus pro derelicto habebat, nullius est momenti, quia qui pro derelicto rem habet, omnimodo a se reiecit nec potest eius operibus uti, quem eo iure ad se pertinere noluit. quod si ab alio adprehensus est, stipulatione ei adquirere poterit: nam et haec genere quodam donatio est. inter hereditarium enim servum et eum, qui pro derelicto habetur, plurimum interest, quoniam alter hereditatis iure retinetur, nec potest relictus videri qui universo hereditatis iure continetur, alter voluntate domini derelictus non potest videri ad usum eius pertinere, a quo relictus est.
Javolenus, Epistles, Book XIV. Where a slave, whom his master has considered as abandoned by him, stipulates for something, his act is void; because anyone who looks upon property as abandoned rejects it altogether, and cannot make use of the services of anyone whom he is unwilling shall belong to him. If, however, he has been seized by another, he can acquire for his benefit by means of a stipulation, for this is a kind of donation. A great difference exists between a slave forming a part of an estate and one who is considered as abandoned; for one of them is retained by hereditary right, and he cannot be considered as abandoned who is subject to the entire right of inheritance, while the other having been intentionally abandoned by his master, cannot be held to be available for the use of him by whom he was rejected.