Fideicommissorum libri
Ex libro II
Dig. 32,10Valens libro secundo fideicommissorum. Si tibi et ei, qui ex tribus liberis meis in funus meum venerit, centum aureos legavero, non minuitur in tua persona legatum, si nemo venit.
Dig. 32,94Valens libro secundo fideicommissorum. Is, qui complures libertos relinquebat, tribus ex his fundum legaverat et petierat, ut curarent, ne de nomine suo exiret. quaerebatur, ex tribus qui primus moriebatur utrum utrique vel alteri ex his, qui sibi in legato coniuncti essent, relinquere partem suam deberet, an possit vel alii conliberto suo eam relinquere. placuit, etsi voluntatis quaestio esset, satis illum facturum etsi alii reliquisset. quod si nulli dedisset, occupantis an omnium conlibertorum et num eorum tantum, quibus pariter legatum esset, petitio fideicommissi esset, dubitabatur. et Iulianus recte omnibus debere putavit.
Valens, Trusts, Book II. A man who left several freedmen devised a tract of land to three of them, and requested them to see that its name was not changed. The question arose if, when the first one of the three died, he would be obliged to leave his share to both of his co-legatees who were joined with him in the legacy, or only to one of them; or whether he could leave it to another who was his fellow-freedman. It was decided that although this was a question of intention, still, the wishes of the testator would be sufficiently complied with if the legatee should leave the land to another of his fellow-freedmen. Where, however, he did not give it to any, could it not be doubted whether the claim for the execution of the trust would belong to the more diligent of the fellow-freedmen, or to all of them; or whether it would only belong to those to whom the legacy was jointly bequeathed? Julianus very properly held that the claim belonged to all the freedmen.
Dig. 33,1,25Valens libro secundo fideicommissorum. Filio familias, quoad in potestate patris sit, in annos singulos dena dari possunt.
Dig. 50,8,6Valens libro secundo fideicommissorum. Legatam municipio pecuniam in aliam rem quam defunctus voluit convertere citra principis auctoritatem non licet. et ideo si unum opus fieri iusserit, quod Falcidiae legis interventu fieri non potest, permittitur summam, quae eo nomine debetur, in id, quod maxime necessarium rei publicae videatur, convertere: sive plures summae in plura opera legantur et legis Falcidiae interventu id quod relinquitur omnium operum exstructioni non sufficit, permittitur in unum opus, quod civitas velit, erogari. sed municipio pecuniam legatam, ut ex reditu eius venatio aut spectacula edantur, senatus in eas causas erogare vetuit: et pecuniam eo legatam in id, quod maxime necessarium municipibus videatur, conferre permittitur, ut in eo munificentia eius qui legavit inscriptione notetur.
Valens, Trusts, Book II. Where a bequest has been left to a town, it cannot be converted to any other use than that intended by the deceased, without the authority of the Emperor; and therefore, if the deceased directed a work to be constructed with it, which cannot be done after the reservation of the fourth authorized by the Falcidian Law, it is permitted for the sum of money to be employed for whatever may appear most necessary for the benefit of the town. The rule is the same where several sums of money are bequeathed for the construction of several works, and, after the deduction under the Falcidian Law, the remainder is not sufficient for the construction of them all, for the money is allowed to be expended for any single work which the State may wish to have constructed. Where, however, money was bequeathed in order that its income may be used for hunting, or for exhibitions, the Senate forbade it to be used for such purposes, and permitted the legacy to be expended upon what was most needed by the city, and to recognize the munificence of the person who made the bequest, authorized that the fact should be commemorated by an inscription.