[PAULUS libro secundo ad Uitellium. ] §32.0.78.prQuaesitum est Stichum seruum ex eo fundo ante annum mortis testatoris abductum et disciplinae traditum, postea in eum fundum non reuersum an deberetur.
[PAULUS, from his second book on Vitellius.] It was asked whether the slave Stichus, who had been taken away from a certain estate a year before the testator's death and put out to training, and had not subsequently returned to that estate, was due.
responsum est, si studendi causa mississet, non quo de fundo eum aliorsum transferret, deberi.
The answer was that if the testator had sent him for the purpose of study, and not to transfer him elsewhere away from the estate, he was due.
§32.0.78.1'Maeui fili, quod iam tibi maximam partem facultatium dederim, contentus esse debes fundo Semproniano cum suis inhabitantibus, id est familia, et quae ibi erunt'. quaesitum est de nominibus debitorum et nummis.
"My son Maevius, since I have already given you the greatest part of my property, you ought to be content with the Sempronian estate with its inhabitants, that is, the household of slaves, and whatever shall be there." A question arose concerning the outstanding debts and cash.
eadem epistulam talem emisit: 'argentum omne et supellectilem, quodcumque habeo, tibi dono et quidquid in praedio Semproniano habeo'. an supcilex, quae in aliis praediis uel domibus esset, ad Maeuium pertineret? et an serui, quos ex eo fundo aliis legauit? responsum est nomina et nummos non uideri deberi, nisi manifeste de his quoque legandis uoluntas defunctae adprobaretur.
The same woman sent the following letter: "I give to you all the silver and furniture, whatever I have, and whatever I have on the Sempronian estate." Did the furniture which was on other estates or in other houses belong to Maevius? And did the slaves whom she bequeathed to others from that estate belong to him? The answer was that debts and cash did not seem to be due, unless the intention of the deceased to bequeath these also was clearly proved.
seruos ex isdem fundis aliis datos deminuisse filii legatum.
Slaves given from the same estates to others diminished the son's legacy.
de argento et suppellectili quae alibi esset eum cuius notio est aestimaturum, ut id optineat, quod testatori placuisse a legatario adprobabitur.
Regarding the silver and furniture which was elsewhere, the judge who had jurisdiction should assess the matter, so that what is proved by the legatee to have pleased the testator may prevail.
§32.0.78.2Praedia quidam reliquit adiectis uerbis: 'uti a me possessa sunt et quaecumque ibi erunt cum moriar': quaesitum est de mancipiis, quae in his praediis morata fuerunt uel operis rustici causa uel alterius officii, ceterisque rebus, quae ibi fuerunt in diem mortis, an ad legatarium pertinerent.
A certain person left estates with the added words: "as they have been possessed by me, and whatever shall be there when I die." A question arose concerning the slaves who had stayed on these estates either for the purpose of rustic labor or for another duty, and the other things which were there on the day of death, whether they belonged to the legatee.
respondit ea omnia, de quibus quaereretur, legata uideri.
He answered that all those things about which the question was asked seemed to be bequeathed.
§32.0.78.3'Peto, ut fundum meum Campanianum Genesiae alumnae meae adscribatis ducentorum aureorum ita uti est'. quaeritur, an fundo et reliqua colonorum et mancipia, si qua mortis tempore in eo fuerint, debeantur.
"I request that you assign my Campanian estate to my foster daughter Genesia at the value of two hundred aurei, just as it is." The question is asked whether the arrears of the coloni and the slaves, if any were on the estate at the time of death, are due along with the estate.
respondit reliqua quidem colonorum non legata: cetera uero uideri illis uerbis 'ita uti est' data.
He answered that the arrears of the coloni were indeed not bequeathed, but that other things seemed to have been given by those words "just as it is".
§32.0.78.4Illud fortasse quaesiturus sit aliquis, cur argenti appellatione etiam factum argentum comprehendetur, cum, si marmor legatum esset, nihil praeter rudem materiam demonstratum uideri posset.
Perhaps someone might ask why, under the designation of "silver", wrought silver is also included, whereas if "marble" were bequeathed, nothing could be seen as indicated except the raw material.
cuius haec ratio traditur, quippe ea, quae talis naturae sint, ut saepius in sua redigi possint initia, ea materiae potentia nicta numquam uires eius effugiant.
The reason for this is handed down as follows: namely, that those things which are of such a nature that they can repeatedly be reduced to their original state, being overcome by the power of the material, never escape its influence.
§32.0.78.5Coccum quod proprio nomine appellatur quin uersicoloribus cederet, nemo dubitauit.
No one has doubted that scarlet, which is called by its own name, is included under multi-colored things.
quin minus porto coracinum aut hysginum aut melinum suo nomine quam coccum purpuraue designatur?
Why, then, is raven-black, hysginum, or Melian yellow designated any less by its own name than scarlet or purple?
§32.0.78.6Cum uir ita legasset: 'quae uxoris causa parata sunt, ei do lego', ego apud praetorem fideicommissarium petebam etiam res aestimatas, quarum pretium in dotem erat, nec optinui, quasi testator non sensisset de his rebus.
When a husband had bequeathed as follows: "I give and bequeath to my wife whatever has been prepared for her use," I claimed before the praetor for trust-bequests even the appraised goods whose value constituted her dowry, but I did not succeed, on the ground that the testator had not intended these things.
atquin si in usum eius datae sint, nihil interest, ab ipsa an ab alio comparatae sunt.
And yet, if they were given for her use, it makes no difference whether they were acquired by herself or by someone else.
postea apud Aburnium Ualentem inueni ita relatum: mulier res aestimatas in dotem dederat ac deinde maritus ei legauerat his uerbis: 'quae eius causa comparata emptaque essent'. dixit emptorum paratorumque appellatione non contineri ea, quae in dotem data essent, nisi si maritus eas res, posteaquam ipsius factae essent, in uxoris usum conuertisset.
Later, I found the following case reported in Aburnius Valens: a woman had given appraised goods as dowry, and then her husband had bequeathed to her with these words: "whatever had been acquired and bought for her sake." He said that what had been given as dowry was not contained under the designation of "things bought and prepared," unless the husband, after they became his own, had converted those things to his wife's use.
§32.0.78.7Rebus quae in fundo sunt legatis accedunt etiam ea, quae tunc non sunt, si esse solent: nec quae casu ibi fuerunt, legata existimantur.
When things which are on an estate are bequeathed, those which are not there at the time are also added, if they are accustomed to be there; nor are things which were there by chance considered to be bequeathed.