[IDEM libro decimo quaestionum. ] §31.0.82.prDebitor decem legauit creditori, quae ei post annum sub pignore debebat.
[THE SAME, from the tenth book of questions.] A debtor bequeathed ten to his creditor, which he owed him after a year under a pledge.
non, ut quidam putant, medii temporis tantum commodum ex testamento debetur, sed tota decem peti possunt: nec tollitur petitio, si interim annus superuenerit: nam sufficit, quod utiliter dies cessit.
Not, as some think, only the advantage of the intermediate time is owed under the will, but the whole ten can be claimed; nor is the claim barred if in the meantime the year has expired, for it is sufficient that the day has ceded advantageously.
quod si uiuo testatore annus superueniat, dicendum erit inutile effici legatum, quamquam constiterit ab initio.
But if the year should expire during the lifetime of the testator, it must be said that the legacy is rendered useless, although it stood valid from the beginning.
sic et in dote praelegata responsum est totam eam ex testamento peti posse.
So also in the case of a prelegacy of a dowry, it has been answered that the whole of it can be claimed under the will.
alioquin secundum illam sententiam si interusurium tantum est in legato, quid dicemus, si fundus legatus sit ex die debitus? nam nec pecunia peti potest, quae non est legata, nec pars fundi facile inueniretur, quae possit pro commodo peti.
Otherwise, according to that opinion, if only the interusurium is in the legacy, what shall we say if a tract of land is bequeathed which is owed from a certain day? For neither can money be claimed which has not been bequeathed, nor could a part of the land easily be found which could be claimed as the advantage.
§31.0.82.1Si Primo et Secundo et Tertio heredibus institutis sic legata dentur: 'si mihi Primus heres non erit, Secundus Titio decem dato: si Secundus mihi heres non erit, Primus Seio fundum Tusculanum dato', utrisque omittentibus hereditatem Primo et Secundo quaerebatur, substituti, quos eis dederat, an et cui legata praestare debent? ab utroque substituto legata debentur.
If Primus, Secundus, and Tertius having been appointed heirs, legacies are given as follows: 'If Primus is not my heir, Secundus shall give ten to Titius; if Secundus is not my heir, Primus shall give the Tusculan estate to Seius,' and both Primus and Secundus reject the inheritance, it was asked whether the substitutes whom he had given to them must perform the legacies, and to whom? The legacies are owed by both substitutes.
§31.0.82.2Seruo alieno posse rem domini legari Ualens scribit: item id quod domino eius pure debetur.
Valens writes that a master's property can be bequeathed to another's slave; likewise, that which is owed unconditionally to his master.
cum enim seruo alieno aliquid in testamento damus, domini persona ad hoc tantum inspicitur, ut sit cum eo testamenti factio, ceterum ex persona serui constitit legatum.
For when we give something to another's slave in a will, the master's person is considered only to the extent that there is capacity to take under a will with him, but otherwise the legacy is established from the person of the slave.
et ideo rectissime Iulianus definit id demum seruo alieno legari posse, quod ipse liber factus capere posset.
And therefore, Julian most correctly defines that only that can be bequeathed to another's slave which he himself, having been made free, could take.
calumniosa est enim illa adnotatio posse legari seruo et quamdiu seruiat: nam et hoc legatum ex persona serui uires accipit: alioquin et illud adnotaremus esse quosdam seruos, qui, licet libertatem consequi non possunt, attamen legatum et hereditatem possunt adquirere domino.
For that annotation is fallacious, that it can be bequeathed to a slave 'also for as long as he remains a slave'; for this legacy also gains its strength from the person of the slave. Otherwise, we should also annotate that there are certain slaves who, although they cannot obtain freedom, can nevertheless acquire a legacy and an inheritance for their master.
ex illo igitur praecepto, quod dicimus serui inspici personam in testamentis, dictum est seruo hereditario legari posse.
Therefore, from that precept by which we say that the person of the slave is considered in wills, it has been said that a bequest can be made to a slave belonging to an inheritance.
ita non mirum, si res domini et quod ei debetur seruo eius pure legari possit, quamuis domino eius non possent haec utiliter legari.
Thus, it is not surprising if the master's property and what is owed to him can be bequeathed unconditionally to his slave, although these things could not be effectively bequeathed to the master himself.