Quaestionum libri
Ex libro XI
Dig. 1,7,34Paulus libro undecimo quaestionum. Quaesitum est, si tibi filius in adoptionem hac lege sit datus, ut post triennium puta eundem mihi in adoptionem des, an actio ulla sit. et Labeo putat nullam esse actionem: nec enim moribus nostris convenit filium temporalem habere.
Paulus, Questions, Book XI. The question arose where a son is given to you in adoption, for instance under this condition that, “after three years, you will give the same person to me in adoption”; whether any action will lie against you. Labeo thinks that there is no cause of action, for it is not in accordance with our customs for anyone to have a son temporarily.
Dig. 15,1,53Idem libro undecimo quaestionum. Si Sticho peculium cum manumitteretur ademptum non est, videtur concessum: debitores autem convenire nisi mandatis sibi actionibus non potest.
Dig. 31,68Paulus libro undecimo quaestionum. Sequens quaestio est, an etiam quae vivus per donationem in uxorem contulit in fideicommissi petitionem veniant. respondi ea extra causam bonorum defuncti computari debere et propterea fideicommisso non contineri, quia ea habitura esset etiam alio herede exsistente. plane nominatim maritus uxoris fidei committere potest, ut et ea restituat.
Paulus, Questions, Book XI. The question now arises whether property which was given by a husband to his wife during his lifetime should be held to constitute a trust. I answered that what she received should be considered separate and apart from the estate of her husband, and therefore was not included in a trust, because the woman would be entitled to it, even though there should be another heir. It is clear, however, that a husband cannot charge his wife with property of this kind for the purpose of delivering it to someone else.
Dig. 31,83Idem libro undecimo quaestionum. Latinus Largus. proxime ex facto incidit species talis. libertinus patronum ex semisse heredem instituit et filiam suam ex alio semisse: fidei commissit filiae, ut quibusdam ancillis patroni restitueret, cum hae manumissae essent, et, si eadem filia heres non esset, substituit ei easdem ancillas. quoniam filia non voluit heres exsistere, ancillae iussu domini, id est patroni adierunt defuncti hereditatem. post aliquantum temporis ab eo manumissae quaerebant, an fideicommissum petere ab eodem patrono possint. rogo ergo, quid de hoc existimes rescribas. respondi nec repetitum videri in hunc casum fideicommissum, sed alterutrum datum vel fideicommissum vel ipsam hereditatem. melius autem dici in eundem casum substitutas videri, in quem casum fideicommissum meruerunt, et ideo ad substitutionem eas vocari. cum enim servo alieno fideicommissum ab uno ex heredibus sub condicione libertatis fuerit datum idemque servus ei heredi substituatur, licet pure substitutio facta sit, tamen sub eadem condicione substitui videtur, sub qua fideicommissum meruit.
The Same, Questions, Book XI. Latinus Largus: The following case recently occurred. A freedman appointed his patron heir to half of his estate, and his daughter to the other half. He charged his daughter to transfer her share to certain female slaves belonging to his patron, as soon as they should be manumitted; and if the said daughter should not become his heir, he substituted for her the same female slaves. As the daughter declined to become her father’s heir, the said female slaves, by order of their master, that is to say of the patron, entered upon the estate of the deceased. The slaves, having been manumitted by their master after a certain time, inquired whether they could demand the execution of the trust by their patron. Hence, I ask you to write to me what your opinion is on this point. I answered that, in this case, the trust did not seem to be repeated, but that one thing or the other, that is to say, either the trust or the estate itself had been granted by the testator. It is, however, under these circumstances better to hold that, the slaves being substituted, and entitled to the trust, were therefore called to the substitution. For when a trust is created to be executed by one of the heirs of a testator, in favor of the slave of another, subject to the condition of his obtaining his freedom, and the same slave is substituted for the said heir; although the substitution may be absolute, this is still considered to have been done subject to the same condition under which he was entitled to the trust.
Dig. 35,2,18Paulus libro undecimo quaestionum. Filius familias qui militaverat decedens patris sui fidei commisit codicillis, ut peculium suum castrense Titio post mortem restitueret: quaerebatur, an ut heres quartam deducere possit. dixi legem Falcidiam inductam esse a divo Pio etiam in intestatorum successionibus propter fideicommissa: sed in proposito nec hereditatem esse, quamvis placeret mihi extraneo herede instituto fieri hereditatem aditione eius: nam cum apud patrem remanet, ius pristinum durat et peculium est. nec huic contrarium est, quod in testamento eius qui apud hostes decessit exercetur Falcidia: nam fictio legis Corneliae et hereditatem et heredem facit. sed me non dubitare, quin debeat id quoque indulgeri legis beneficium, siquidem quasi patris familiae bona restituere cogitur et heres scriptus omissa ex testamento aditione exemplo edicti legatorum nomine convenietur. 1His consequens erit, ut, si ex fructibus medio tempore quartam et quartae fructus habuerit pater, etiam Trebellianum senatus consultum inducamus et utiles actiones exerceri possint fiatque hereditas post restitutionem.
Paulus, Questions, Book XI. A son under paternal control who had served in the army, at his death, charged his father to give Titius his peculium castrense. The question arose whether the heir could deduct a fourth of it. I said that the Falcidian Law, as interpreted by the Divine Pius, also included the successions of intestates where there had been trusts created; but in the case stated the peculium was not a part of the estate although I would hold that where a foreign heir was appointed it would become a portion of the estate by his entering upon the same. For when the peculium remains in the hands of the father, his ancient right continues to exist, and the property is still peculium. Nor is this contrary by the fact that the Falcidian Law applies to the wills of those who die in the hands of the enemy, since the fiction of the Cornelian Law creates both the estate and the heir. However, I do not doubt that the father ought also to enjoy the benefit of the law; for if, indeed, he is required to surrender the property as having belonged to the head of the family, the appointed heir, having failed to enter upon the estate under the will, can be sued by the legatees in conformity with the terms of the Edict. 1The consequence of this is that if the father should, in the meantime, obtain the fourth and the profits of the same, we can apply the Trebellian Decree of the Senate, and equitable actions can be brought in order that the property may become a part of the estate after restitution has been made.
Dig. 36,1,62Idem libro undecimo quaestionum. Patronus ex debita portione heres institutus sextam partem restituere rogatus restituit: non transeunt ex Trebelliano actiones, quoniam non fuit debitum quod restituit, et ideo si per errorem fecit, etiam repetetur.
The Same, Questions, Book XI. A patron who had been appointed heir to that portion of an estate to which he was legally entitled, having been charged to transfer the sixth part of the same, did so. In this instance the rights of action do not pass under the Trebellian Decree of the Senate, as the property which was transferred was not due, and therefore if this was done through mistake, it can be recovered.
Dig. 46,1,55Idem libro undecimo quaestionum. Si ita stipulatus a Seio fuero: ‘quantam pecuniam Titio quandoque credidero, dare spondes?’ et fideiussores accepero, deinde Titio saepius credidero: nempe Seius in omnes summas obligatus est et per hoc fideiussores quoque, et id, quod ex bonis eius servari potest, omnibus aequo iure proficere debet.
The Same, Questions, Book XI. If I stipulate as follows with Seius, “Do you promise to pay any sum of money which I may lend to Titius, at any time?” and I receive sureties, and afterwards very frequently lend Titius money, Seius, as well as his sureties, will certainly be liable for all the sums loaned, and anything that can be obtained from his property should be credited equally upon all the debts.