[ULPIANUS libro quinquagesimo ad edictum. ] §29.5.3.15i quoque, qui non potuerunt alias ad libertatem peruenire, ut puta si hac lege distractus erat quis, ne manumitteretur, poterunt propter hoc, quod in commune utile est, ad libertatem peruenire.
Those also who could not otherwise arrive at liberty—for instance, if anyone had been sold under the condition that he should not be manumitted—will be able to arrive at liberty on account of this, which is of public utility.
§29.5.3.16De his quoque seruis, qui testamento manumissi sunt, perinde atque seruis supplicium sumendum est.
Concerning those slaves also who have been manumitted by a will, punishment must be inflicted just as if they were slaves.
§29.5.3.17De his, qui antequam testamentum occisi occisaeue aperiretur profugissent posteaque aperto testamento liberi scripti inuenirentur, perinde ac si de seruis quaestio habenda suppliciumque sumendum est: nam est aequissimum ultioni dominorum non obstare indulgentiam ipsorum, quam quisque pleniorem esset expertus, eo grauiorem sceleri suo poenam merebitur.
Concerning those who fled before the will of the slain man or woman was opened, and were afterwards found written as free when the will was opened, an inquiry must be held and punishment inflicted just as if concerning slaves; for it is most equitable that their own indulgence should not stand in the way of the vengeance of their masters, and the fuller the indulgence each one had experienced, the heavier the punishment he will deserve for his crime.
§29.5.3.18Quod ad causam testamenti pertinens relictum erit ab eo qui occisus esse dicetur, id ne quis sciens dolo malo aperiendum recitandum describendumque curet, edicto cauetur, priusquam de ea familia quaestio ex senatus consulto habita suppliciumque de noxiis sumptum fuerit.
It is provided by the edict that no one shall knowingly and with malicious intent cause to be opened, read, or copied that which, pertaining to the matter of a will, has been left by him who is said to have been killed, before the inquiry concerning the household has been held in accordance with the senate decree and punishment has been inflicted on the guilty.
§29.5.3.19Aperire autem hic ille uidetur qui naturaliter aperit, siue sint signatae siue non sint legatae, sed tantum naturaliter clausae.
Now, he is here deemed to open who physically opens, whether they are sealed or not bound, but only physically closed.
§29.5.3.20Aperire accipere debemus prohibitos nos uel palam publice uel secreto: omnis enim apertura prohibita est.
We must understand that we are forbidden to open either openly and publicly or in secret; for every opening is prohibited.
§29.5.3.21Si quis ignorans occisum aperuerit, non debet hoc edicto teneri.
If anyone, being ignorant of the murder, has opened them, he ought not to be held liable under this edict.
§29.5.3.22Et si sciens, non tamen dolo aperuit, aeque non tenebitur, si forte per imperitiam uel per rusticitatem ignarus edicti praetoris uel senatus consulti aperuit.
And if he opened them knowingly, but yet without malicious intent, he will likewise not be held liable, if for instance through lack of skill or through rusticity, being ignorant of the praetor's edict or of the senate decree, he opened them.
§29.5.3.23Si quis tabulas quidem non aperuit naturaliter, linum autem inciderit, excusatus erit, quia dolo caret, qui ipsas tabulas non aperuit.
If anyone did not physically open the tablets, but has cut the cord, he will be excused, because he lacks malicious intent who did not open the tablets themselves.
§29.5.3.24Si autem non totum testamentum, sed pars eius aperta sit, dicendum est in edictum incidisse eum qui aperuit: parui enim refert, utrum totum an pars aperiatur.
But if not the whole will, but a part of it has been opened, it must be said that he who opened it has fallen under the edict; for it matters little whether the whole or a part is opened.
§29.5.3.25Si quis codicillos aperuerit, testamentum non aperuerit, in edictum incidit: nam et codicilli ad causam testamenti pertinent.
If anyone has opened codicils but has not opened the will, he falls under the edict; for codicils also pertain to the matter of a will.
§29.5.3.26Item siue iure ualeat id quod apertum est siue non ualeat, attamen edicto locus est.
Likewise, whether that which has been opened is legally valid or not valid, there is nevertheless room for the edict.
§29.5.3.27Eadem seruantur et de his, quae ad causam substitutionis pertinent, si pupillus pupillaue occisus occisaue esse dicetur.
The same rules are observed also concerning those things which pertain to the matter of substitution, if a male or female ward is said to have been killed.
§29.5.3.28Si alius aperuit, alius recitauit, alius descripserit, omnes in edictum incident, qui singula eorum fecerunt.
If one person opened, another read, and another copied, all who did those individual acts will fall under the edict.
§29.5.3.29Non tantum ex testamento, sed etiam ab intestato hereditas ad hoc edictum pertinet, ut ne quis adeat bonorumue possessionem petat, antequam quaestio de familia habeatur, ne heres propter compendium suum familiae facinus occultaret.
Not only inheritance by will, but also from an intestate, pertains to this edict, so that no one may enter upon the inheritance or petition for possession of the goods before the inquiry concerning the household is held, lest the heir, for his own gain, should conceal the crime of the household.
§29.5.3.30Eleganter Scaeuola ait, ut quis ad heredem suum utiles actiones transmittat, si forte ante aditionem decessit, exploratum esse debere idcirco eum non adire, quod senatus consulto edictoque terreatur.
Scaevola elegantly says that, for anyone to transmit beneficial actions to his heir, if he should happen to die before entry upon the inheritance, it must be established that he did not enter upon it precisely because he was deterred by the senate decree and the edict.
§29.5.3.31Si condicioni intra diem ex die mortis praestitutum parere iussi ignorantia non paruerunt, si idcirco ignoratum est, quia metu senatus consulti aperiri tabulae non potuerunt, succurritur eis ad implendam condicionem.
If those who were ordered to comply with a condition within a prescribed period from the day of death did not comply through ignorance, and if the ignorance was due to the fact that the tablets could not be opened for fear of the senate decree, they are granted relief for the purpose of fulfilling the condition.
§29.5.3.32Si et aliud impedimentum sit de non adeunda hereditate uel aperiendarum tabularum, sit et senatus consulti, nihil prodesse impedimentum senatus consulti, si et aliud fuit: ueluti si praegnas uxor occisi fuit uel etiam putabatur et propterea adire hereditatem institutus non potuerit.
If there is both another impediment to not entering upon the inheritance or to opening the tablets, and also that of the senate decree, the impediment of the senate decree is of no avail if there was also another; as, for example, if the wife of the slain man was pregnant, or was even thought to be so, and on that account the instituted heir could not enter upon the inheritance.