Fideicommissorum libri
Ex libro IX
Dig. 35,2,32Maecianus libro nono fideicommissorum. Poenales actiones sive legitimae sive honorariae exceptis popularibus in bonis actoris non ideo minus computandae sunt, quia morte reorum intercidere possunt. e contrario autem eaedem actiones nihil bonis rei defuncto eo detrahunt. sed ne in actoris quidem bonis defuncto eo iniuriarum actio poterit computari, quia et ipsa simul cum eo intercidit, ut usus fructus et id quod in dies menses annosve singulos alicui quoad vivat debeatur. etenim ea demum obligatio rei bonis deminutionem praestat, quae in heredem transit. nec contrarium est, quod vivente reo eo minus in bonis eius intellegebatur: nam et si ita stipulatus esset, ut cum moreretur debere ei inciperet, tamen augerentur bona eius, quemadmodum, si ipse sub eadem condicione promisisset, defuncto eo minuerentur. 1Honorariae quoque actiones, quae intra certum tempus a praetore promittuntur, cum bonis actoris defuncto eo augmentum rei decessionemve, si tales erunt, ut in heredem quoque transeant, praestabunt. 2Iulianus scribit, si utriusque heredis pars exhausta est legatis et alter ex heredibus cautionem praetoriam accepit a legatariis, non aequaliter, sed pro suo modo legis Falcidiae rationem et actionem ex stipulatu habiturum. omnes enim praetorias stipulationes eiusdem interpretationis esse: nam constare ex iudicatum solvi stipulatione, sive a parte actoris sive a rei plures heredes exstitissent, non omnibus nec adversus omnes actionem contingere, sed dumtaxat his qui vicissent et adversus victos, hisque, adversus quos res defensa non esset, adversus eos, qui rem non defendissent. 3Annua bima trima die aureis centenis legatis ex omnibus summis, non tantum ex posterioribus portionem legis Falcidiae detrahi placuit. 4Si Titio viginti legatis portio per legem Falcidiam detracta esset, cum ipse quoque quinque Seio rogatus esset restituere, vindius noster tantum Seio pro portione ex quinque detrahendum ait, quantum Titio ex viginti detractum esset. quae sententia et aequitatem et rationem magis habet, quia exemplo heredis legatarius ad fideicommissa praestanda obligabitur: nec quia ex sua persona legatarius inducere legem Falcidiam non possit, idcirco quod passus esset non imputaturum: nisi forte testator ita fidei eius commississet, ut totum, quidquid ex testamento cepisset, restitueret. 5Si autem manumittere servum vel suum vel alienum rogatus sit, omnimodo praestare debebit libertatem, nec hoc contrarium est superiori, quia favor libertatis saepe et alias benigniores sententias exprimit.
Marcianus, Trusts, Book IX. Penal actions, whether they are derived from the Civil or the Prætorian Law, with the exception of popular actions, should, none the less, be reckoned among the assets of the party entitled to them, because they become extinguished by the death of the criminal. Moreover, on the other hand, these actions do not take anything from the estate of the culprit in case of his death. But a right of action for injury sustained cannot be counted as a part of the estate of the person entitled to the same, in case of his death; because it itself is extinguished at that time, just as an usufruct, or an allowance which is payable to anyone at stated periods, for instance monthly or annually, as long as he lives. For an obligation of any kind only affords ground for the diminution of the property of a debtor, where it is transferred to his heir; nor, on the other hand, should the debtor be understood to have had that much less property during his lifetime, since, if anyone should stipulate that a sum shall begin to be due when he dies, his estate will, nevertheless, be increased, just as if he himself should promise, under the same condition, that it shall be diminished at the time of his death. 1Honorary actions, also, which are permitted by the Prætor to be brought within a certain time, increase the estate of the person entitled to bring them, at the time of his death, and decrease that of the person against whom they can be brought, if they are such as also pass to the heir. 2Julianus says that if the shares of two heirs are exhausted by legacies, and one of them has received a prætorian bond from the legatees, he will be entitled to bring an action on the stipulation, not for half, but in proportion to his share of everything acquired by them over and above the amount authorized by the Falcidian Law. For all prætorian stipulations are subject to the same interpretation, as where a stipulation has been made it is settled that the judgment shall be paid, whether the plaintiff or the defendant leaves several heirs. The action cannot be brought by all, or against all of them, but only in favor of the heirs of those who gained the suit, and against the heirs of those who lost it, and in favor of those against whom no defence was made, and against those who did not defend the suit. 3Where a legacy of a hundred aurei is left, payable in one, two, and three years, it has been decided that the Falcidian portion shall be deducted from all the payments made, and not merely from the last one. 4Where part of the legacy of twenty aurei bequeathed to Titius has been deducted under the Falcidian Law, and the legatee was requested to pay five aurei to Seius, our Vindius says that the same proportion can be deducted by the legatee from the five due to Seius as was deducted from the twenty due to Titius. This opinion is founded both on equity and reason, because, like the heir, the legatee is obliged to execute the trust, and, as he cannot, personally, profit by the Falcidian Law, the loss which he has sustained must not be borne by him, unless the testator had charged him to deliver everything that he had received under the terms of the will. 5If, however, the legatee should be requested to manumit either his own slave, or one belonging to another, he must, by all means, give him freedom. This is not contrary to what is above stated, because the favor conceded to liberty frequently gives rise to other and even more indulgent decisions.