The Same, Opinions, Book XIII. The father of a family having appointed his posthumous child his heir by his will, substituted his brother, Gaius Seius, for himself, or his son if he should die before reaching the age of puberty, and then substituted Titius for Gaius Seius, and afterwards said: “If my brother, Gaius Seius, whom I substituted in the first place, should be my heir, then I appoint Titius trustee.” I ask, if the son should be the heir of his father, and having died before the age of puberty, his brother should become the heir of the testator by virtue of the substitution, whether the trust must be discharged when it was created as follows: “If Gaius Seius, my brother, should be my heir”? I answered that the brother of the deceased, who was appointed or substituted in both cases, must deliver the property which the testator bequeathed, if the son should die before reaching the age of puberty, and that the meaning of the following words cannot be disputed: “If Gaius Seius should be my heir, then I desire the property to be given”, since it is a fact that he was the heir of the testator.

The Same, Opinions, Book XIII. “Let my great-grandson, Gaius Seius, be heir to half of my property, with the exception of my house, and that of my father, in which I live, with everything contained therein. Let it be known that all these things do not constitute part of the estate which I give to him.” I ask, if there should be in said houses any silver plate, notes of debtors, furniture, or slaves, whether all this property found there shall belong to the other heirs who have been appointed. Paulus answered that the notes of debtors are not included, and that they will belong to all the heirs in common; but, so far as the other property is concerned, the grandson will have no claim to the same. 1Titius, at the time that he left certain lands and other property in a city to his nephew, devised among others the Seian Estate, which he, as head of the household, reserved entirely for himself, as long as he might live; but, in order the more easily to find a tenant, he divided said Estate into two parts, and designated one the Upper Seian Estate, and the other the Lower Seian Estate, which names were derived from the respective situations of the same. I ask whether this entire Estate will belong to his nephew. Paulus answered that if the testator possessed the whole Estate under one name, then, even though he rented it after having divided it, all must be delivered under the terms of the trust; unless the heir can clearly prove that the testator had in mind only a portion of said Estate.

Paulus, Opinions, Book XVI. “If my daughters, Mævia and Nigidia, should become my heirs, then let Mævia take from my estate, and have as a preferred legacy, such-and-such of my lands, with the cottages thereon, and the slaves who have charge of the same; and, in addition, all the fields adjoining them, which I have obtained by purchase or in any other way whatsoever, for the purpose of uniting them to said lands; together with all the slaves, flocks, beasts of burden, and other personal property to be found on said land, or any part of the same, at the time of my death, in the best and most perfect condition that I then possessed them, or (to speak more plainly) everything that may be thereon.” On one of the tracts of land which had been left as a preferred legacy, there was a building used for keeping records, in which were found instruments relating to the purchases of many slaves, and others having reference to real property, various contracts and the promissory notes of debtors. I ask whether these instruments were to be considered the common property of the heirs. I answered that, according to the facts stated, neither the documents above mentioned relating to purchases or debts, which were found on the land left as a preferred legacy, appeared to be included in the bequest. 1Where a house is devised as follows: “I charge my heirs to permit So-and-So to have the house in which I reside, and everything included therein, without excepting any utensils whatever,” the testator is not held to have had in his mind any money or obligations of debtors.

The Same, Opinions, Book XIII. Gaius Seius devised to Mævius and Seia certain tracts of land in different localities, and provided as follows, “I wish three hundred thousand reeds to be furnished annually by the Potician to the Lutatien Estate, together with a thousand pounds of well-cleaned osier, also, every year.” I ask whether this legacy will be extinguished by the death of the legatee. Paulus answered that a servitude, either personal or real, does not seem to have been created in accordance with law; but that an action on the ground of a trust will lie in favor of the party to whom the Lutatian Estate was devised. Therefore, as the legacy was to be paid annually, it is considered to terminate with the death of the legatee.

Paulus, Opinions, Book XIII. I ask, where the usufruct of land is left and the said land becomes subject to temporary taxes, what will be the law in this case? Paulus answered that it would be the same in this instance as where ordinary taxes are imposed; and therefore that this burden must be sustained by the usufructuary.

Paulus, Opinions, Book XIII. I gave it as my opinion that if, after the execution of the will, any slaves were placed by the testator upon the land devised to Seia, for the purpose of cultivating the same, they belonged to the said land and were also included in its equipment; even though the testator enumerated the slaves who were there at the time that he made the devise, as he mentioned them not for the purpose of diminishing the legacy, but in order to increase it. Moreover, there is no doubt that slaves who have been brought on land for the purpose of cultivating it are included in its equipment. 1Paulus held that neither crops which are stored, nor a stud of horses, are included in the devise of a country-house with its equipment, but that the furniture forms part of it. A slave skilled in the art of building, who pays his master a certain sum of money every year, is not included in the equipment of the house.

The Same, Opinions, Book XIII. Paulus gave it as his opinion that, even though the slave of another whom a testator desired to be manumitted by one of his heirs, under the impression that he belonged to himself, was concerned, he who was asked to manumit him should be compelled to purchase the slave, and liberate him; as he did not think a case involving freedom, and one relating to the disposition of money under a trust, were similar. 1Paulus gave an opinion as follows, “Believe me, Zoilus, that my son Martial is grateful to you, and not to you alone, but also to your children” (meaning that the intention of the deceased, with reference to a benefit to be conferred upon the children of Zoilus, was included in this clause, they being slaves), “no greater service can be rendered them than to give them their freedom.” Therefore the Governor should execute the will of the deceased.