Ad legem Iuliam libri
Ex libro V
Dig. 29,2,80Paulus libro quinto ad legem Iuliam. Si solus heres ex pluribus partibus fuero institutus, unam partem omittere non possum nec interest, in quibusdam habeam substitutum nec ne. 1Idem puto etiam, si aliis mixtus heredibus ex pluribus partibus heres institutus sim, quod et hic adeundo unam portionem omnes adquiro, si tamen delatae sint. 2Item si servus meus ex parte heres institutus sit pure, ex parte sub condicione, dato scilicet coherede, et iussu meo adierit, deinde eo manumisso condicio alterius portionis exstiterit, verius est non mihi esse adquisitam illam portionem, sed ipsum comitari: omnia enim paria permanere debent in id tempus, quo alterius portionis condicio exstet, ut adquiratur ei, cui prior portio adquisita est. 3Ego quidem puto et si adhuc in potestate sit, iterum adeundum esse, si condicio exstiterit, et illud quod dicimus semel adeundum, in eiusdem persona locum habet, non cum per alium adquirenda est hereditas.
Paulus, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. If I should be appointed sole heir to several shares in an estate, I cannot reject one share, nor does it make any difference whether or not I have a substitute for said share. 1I think that the same rule will apply, even where I have been appointed together with other heirs, or have been appointed heir to several shares, because by the acceptance of one of the shares, I will acquire all of them, if they should be rejected. 2Moreover, if one of my slaves has been absolutely appointed an heir to a portion of an estate, and conditionally appointed to another portion, having, for example, a co-heir, and he enters upon the estate by my direction, and after he has been manumitted, the condition upon which the other portion of the estate depends is fulfilled; the better opinion is that the first portion is not acquired by me but follows the slave himself. For everything should remain in the same state at the time when the condition of the second share was fulfilled, in order that it may be acquired by him who was entitled to the first portion. 3Therefore, I think that if the slave remains under the control of his original master, he must enter upon the estate a second time, if the condition should be fulfilled; and when we stated that the heir should only enter upon the estate but once, this has reference to the heir himself personally, and does not apply where the estate is acquired through the intervention of another.