Digestorum libri
Ex libro LXXVIII
Dig. 6,1,56Idem libro septuagensimo octavo digestorum. Vindicatio non ut gregis, ita et peculii recepta est, sed res singulas is, cui legatum peculium est, petet.
The Same, Digest, Book LXXVIII. A suit for the recovery of a peculium will not be allowed, as it is in the case of a flock; but a party to whom a peculium was bequeathed must bring an action for the separate articles composing the same.
Dig. 28,6,30Iulianus libro septuagesimo octavo digestorum. Quidam testamento Proculum ex parte quarta et Quietum ex parte dimidia et quarta heredem instituit, deinde Quieto Florum, Proculo Sosiam heredes substituit, deinde, si neque Florus neque Sosia heredes essent, tertio gradu ex parte dimidia et quarta coloniam Leptitanorum et ex quarta complures heredes substituit in plures quam tres uncias: Quietus hereditatem adiit, Proculus et Sosia vivo testatore decesserunt: quaeritur, quadrans Proculo datus ad Quietum an ad substitutos tertio gradu pertineat. respondi eam videri voluntatem patris familias fuisse, ut tertio gradu scriptos heredes ita demum substituerit, si tota hereditas vacasset, idque apparere evidenter ex eo, quod plures quam duodecim uncias inter eos distribuisset, et idcirco partem quartam hereditatis de qua quaeritur ad Quietum pertinere:
Julianus, Digest, Book LXXVIII. A certain man, by his will, appointed Proculus heir to a fourth part of his estate, and Quietus to the remaining three-fourths of the same; and afterwards substituted, as heirs, Florus for Quietus, and Sosias for Proculus; then, if neither Florus nor Sosias should become the heirs, he substituted the colony of the Leptitians heirs to three-quarters, and several heirs to an amount exceeding the remaining quarter. Proculus and Sosias died during the lifetime of the testator and Quietus entered upon the estate. The question arose whether the fourth left to Proculus should belong to Quietus, or to those who had been substituted in the third degree. I answered that the intention of the testator seemed to have been that those heirs whom he substituted in the third degree should only have a right to the succession where the entire estate had been abandoned; and that this intention was apparent from the fact that he had distributed more than twelve shares among the substitutes; and therefore that the fourth part of the estate, which was in question, would belong to Quietus.
Dig. 30,101Idem libro septuagesimo octavo digestorum. Si servo meo Stichus legatus fuerit testamento idque legatum repudiavero, deinde prolatis codicillis apparuerit mihi quoque eundem Stichum legatum esse, nihilo minus eundem vindicare possum. 1Si ei qui in hostium potestate est legatum fuerit et is apud hostes decesserit, nullius momenti legatum erit, quamvis postliminio confirmari potuit.
The Same, Digest, Book LXXVIII. If Stichus is bequeathed by will to one of my slaves, and I reject the legacy; and afterwards, a codicil having been produced, it becomes apparent that Stichus was bequeathed to me also, I can, nevertheless, claim him. 1Where a legacy is left to a person who is in the hands of the enemy, and he dies while there; the legacy will be of no force or effect, although it can be confirmed by the right of postliminium.
Dig. 33,2,10Iulianus libro septuagesimo octavo digestorum. Si Titio fundus et eiusdem fundi usus fructus legatus fuerit, erit in potestate eius, fundum an usum fructum vindicare malit. et si fundum elegerit, necessario plenam proprietatem habebit, licet usum fructum a se reppulerit: si vero usum fructum habere maluerit et proprietatem fundi reppulerit, solum usum fructum habebit.
Julianus, Digest, Book LXX. If a tract of land and the usufruct of the same should be left to Titius, he will have the right to claim either the land or the usufruct; and if he selects the land, he will necessarily be entitled to the full ownership of the same, even though he has rejected the usufruct. Where, however, he prefers to have the usufruct, and rejects the ownership of the land, he will only be entitled to the usufruct.
Dig. 34,8,1Iulianus libro septuagesimo octavo digestorum. Si quis hereditatem vel legatum sibi adscripserit, quaeritur, an hereditas vel legatum pro non scripto habeatur. et quid, si substitutum habeat huiusmodi institutio? respondit: pars hereditatis, de qua me consuluisti, ad substitutum pertinet: nam senatus cum poenas legis Corneliae constitueret adversus eum, qui sibi hereditatem vel legatum scripsisset, eodem modo improbasse videtur, quo improbatae sunt illae: ‘qua ex parte me Titius heredem scriptum in tabulis suis recitaverit, ex ea parte heres esto’, ut perinde haberentur, ac si insertae testamento non fuissent.
Julianus, Digest, Book LXXVIII. Where anyone has been asked to write the bequest of an estate or a legacy in a will to himself, the question arises whether the said bequest of the estate or the legacy shall be considered as not having been written; and also whether under an appointment made in this way, an heir can have a substitute. The answer was that the portion of the estate concerning which you have asked advice belongs to the substitute, for when the Senate fixed the penalties of the Cornelian Law against a person who, in a will, appointed himself heir or legatee of an estate, he is also held to have, in the same way, rendered appointments of an inveigling character void, as for instance, the following, “Let Titius be my heir to the same portion of the estate for which he himself has appointed me by his will,” as provisions of this kind are considered just as if they had not been inserted in the will.