[ULPIANUS libro uicesimo quinto ad Sabinum. ] §33.8.8.prDenique Pegasus respondit, si statulibero, cui peculium legatum sit, heres interim crediderit, id ipso iure detrahi et corpora singula etiam per hoc aes alienum deminui.
[ULPIANUS on Sabinus, Book XXV] Finally, Pegasus answered that if, in the meantime, the heir should lend money to a conditionally free slave to whom a peculium has been legacyed, that amount is deducted by operation of law, and the individual items are also diminished by this debt.
§33.8.8.1Proinde si pure libertatem accipiet et heres uel uiuo domino uel ante aditam hereditatem seruo crediderit, legatum peculii minuetur secundum Iuliani sententiam, licet dominus serui numquam fuerit.
Therefore, if he is to receive freedom unconditionally, and the heir, either during the lifetime of the master or before the inheritance is accepted, has lent money to the slave, the legacy of the peculium will be diminished according to Julian's opinion, although he was never the master of the slave.
§33.8.8.2Qui Stichum et Pamphilum seruos habebat, testamento eos manumisit et unicuique peculium suum legauit.
A person who had two slaves, Stichus and Pamphilus, manumitted them by testament and legacyed to each his own peculium.
placet, quod alter alteri debet, de peculio eius decedere et alterius accedere legato.
It is settled that what one owes to the other is deducted from his peculium and added to the legacy of the other.
§33.8.8.3Item quaeritur, si seruo libertas data sit, si decem dedisset heredi, peculiumque ei legatum sit, an decem, quae dedisset heredi, debeant de peculio decedere.
Likewise, it is asked whether, if freedom is given to a slave on condition that he pays ten to the heir, and the peculium is legacyed to him, the ten that he paid to the heir should be deducted from the peculium.
et est uerum quod Sabino placuit, hoc minus esse in peculio legato.
And what Sabinus approved is true: namely, that the legacyed peculium is less by this amount.
§33.8.8.4Plus ait Sabinus, si statuliber seruum heredi uendiderit, perinde desinere eum in peculio esse, atque si extraneo uendidisset.
Sabinus goes further and says that if a conditionally free slave sells a slave to the heir, that slave ceases to be part of the peculium just as if he had sold him to a stranger.
§33.8.8.5His consequenter quaeritur, si seruus cum domino de libertate pactus fuerit et partem pecuniae dederit et ante quam residuum dederit dominus decesserit liberumque esse testamento iusserit cum peculio legato, an quod domino dederit in peculio sit imputandum.
In consequence of this, it is asked whether, if a slave has agreed with his master for his freedom and has paid a part of the money, and before he pays the remainder the master dies and orders in his testament that the slave be free with his peculium legacyed, what he paid to the master is to be reckoned in the peculium.
et ait Labeo de peculio decedere.
And Labeo says that it is deducted from the peculium.
plane si nondum dederat, sed, donec totum traderet, pro deposito apud eum fuerit, id in peculio esse placuit.
Clearly, if he had not yet paid it, but, until he should deliver the whole, it was held by him as a deposit, it is held that this is in the peculium.
§33.8.8.6Item si seruo peculium sit legatum et a debitore eius peculiari heres uetitus sit petere, uerum est hoc minus esse in legato peculio, hoc est detrahendum id quod debitori legatum est.
Likewise, if a peculium is legacyed to a slave, and the heir is forbidden to demand payment from a debtor of that peculium, it is true that the legacyed peculium is less by this amount; that is, what is legacyed to the debtor must be deducted.
§33.8.8.7Interdum etsi non sit legatum peculium, uelut legatum sic accipitur, id est in huiusmodi specie: quidam seruo libertatem, si rationes reddidisset, dederat, et si heredibus centum intulisset.
Sometimes, even if a peculium is not legacyed, it is treated as if it were legacyed, that is, in a case of this kind: a certain man had given freedom to a slave, provided he should render his accounts and pay one hundred to the heirs.
imperator igitur noster cum patre rescripsit, peculium quidem non nisi legatum deberi: 'uerum', inquit, 'si condicionibus praescriptis paruit seruus, testatorem uoluisse eum retinere peculium interpretamur': uidelicet ex eo, quod ex peculio eum insserat centum inferre.
Therefore, our Emperor, together with his father, wrote in a rescript that indeed a peculium is not owed unless it has been legacyed, but 'if,' he said, 'the slave has complied with the prescribed conditions, we interpret that the testator wished him to retain the peculium'; namely, from the fact that he had ordered him to pay the hundred out of the peculium.
§33.8.8.8Utrum autem id demum peculium accipimus, quod mortis tempore fuit, an uero et quod postea accessit applicamus uel quod decessit detrahimus? et Iulianus alias accipiendum legatum peculii ait, si ipsi seruo legetur, alias, si alii: nam si ipsi, id tempus in legato spectandum, quo dies legati cedit: si uero extraneo, mortis tempus, sic tamen, ut incrementa ex rebus peculiaribus ad eum perueniant, ut puta partus ancillarum uel fetus pecorum: quod autem ex operis suis uel ex alia re accedit, id, si alii quam ipsi legetur peculium, non debebitur.
Now, do we accept only that as peculium which existed at the time of death, or do we also add what has accrued afterwards, or deduct what has decreased? And Julian says that a legacy of a peculium must be accepted in one way if it is legacyed to the slave himself, and in another way if to someone else; for if to the slave himself, that time must be regarded in the legacy when the right to the legacy vests, but if to a stranger, the time of death, in such a way, however, that the increases from the things in the peculium should come to him, as for example the offspring of female slaves or the young of cattle; but what accrues from his own labors or from any other source will not be due if the peculium is legacyed to someone other than the slave himself.
hoc utrumque Iulianus secundum uoluntatem testatoris scribit: cum enim ipsi suum peculium legatur, uerisimile est eum omne augmentum ad ipsum pertinere uoluisse, cui patrimonium manumisso futurum est, cum alii, non: sic tamen, ut, si in alterius persona hoc eum sensisse appareat, idem dicas.
Julian writes both of these according to the will of the testator; for when his own peculium is legacyed to the slave himself, it is likely that the testator wished every increase to belong to him, whose patrimony it will be upon manumission, whereas when it is legacyed to someone else, this is not likely; provided, however, that if it appears that the testator intended this in the case of the other person, you should say the same.