[SCAEUOLA libro primo digestorum. ] §2.15.3.prImperatores Antoninus et Uerus ita rescripserunt: 'Priuatis pactionibus non dubium est non laedi ius ceterorum.
[SCAEUOLA in the first book of the Digests.] The Emperors Antoninus and Verus issued the following rescript: "There is no doubt that the rights of third parties are not prejudiced by private agreements.
quare transactione, quae inter heredem et matrem defuncti facta est, neque testamentum rescissum uideri posse neque manumissis uel legatariis actiones suae ademptae.
Therefore, by a compromise made between the heir and the mother of the deceased, it cannot be deemed that the will is rescinded, nor that the actions of the manumitted slaves or the legatees are taken away.
quare quidquid ex testamento petunt, scriptum heredem conuenire debent: qui in transactione hereditatis aut cauit sibi pro oneribus hereditatis, aut si non cauit, non debet neglegentiam suam ad alienam iniuriam referre. ’ Cum transactio propter fideicommissum facta esset et postea codicilli reperti sunt: quaero, an quanto minus ex transactione consecuta mater defuncti fuerit quam pro parte sua est, id ex fideicommissi causa consequi debeat.
Consequently, whatever they claim under the will, they must sue the appointed heir: who, in the compromise of the inheritance, either took security for himself against the burdens of the inheritance, or, if he did not, ought not to impute his own negligence to the injury of another." When a compromise had been made on account of a fideicommissum, and afterwards codicils were found: I ask whether the mother of the deceased ought to recover on account of the fideicommissum so much less than her share as she obtained from the compromise.
respondit debere.
He answered that she ought to recover it.
§2.15.3.1Debitor, cuius pignus creditor distraxit, cum Maeuio, qui se legitimum creditoris heredem esse iactabat, minimo transegit: postea testamento prolato Septicium heredem esse apparuit.
A debtor whose pledge the creditor had sold made a compromise for a very small amount with Maevius, who was boasting that he was the intestate heir of the creditor; afterwards, on the production of a will, it appeared that Septicius was the heir.
quaesitum est, si agat pigneraticia debitor cum Septicio, an is uti possit exceptione transactionis factae cum Maeuio, qui heres eo tempore non fuerit: possitque Septicius pecuniam, quae Maeuio ut heredi a debitore numerata est, condictione repetere, quasi sub praetextu hereditatis acceptam.
It was asked: if the debtor should bring an action on pledge against Septicius, whether the latter could employ the exception of the compromise made with Maevius, who at that time was not the heir; and whether Septicius could recover by a condictio the money paid to Maevius as heir by the debtor, as having been accepted under the pretext of an inheritance.
respondit secundum ea quae proponerentur non posse, quia neque cum eo ipse transegit nec negotium Septicii Maeuius gerens accepit.
He answered that, according to the facts proposed, he could not do either, because he himself had not compromised with the debtor, nor had Maevius accepted the money while managing the business of Septicius.