[PAULUS libro decimo quaestionum. ] §34.3.25.prLegaui Titio quod mihi debetur uel adiecta certa quantitate siue specie uel non adiecta, aut ex contrario aeque cum distinctione, ueluti 'Titio quod ei debeo' uel ita 'Titio centum quae ei debeo': quaero, an per omnia requirendum putes, an debitum sit.
[PAULUS in the tenth book of Questions.] Suppose I have bequeathed to Titius what is owed to me, whether with a certain quantity or specific thing added, or not added; or conversely, likewise with a distinction, as: 'To Titius what I owe him', or thus: 'To Titius the hundred which I owe him': I ask whether you think that in all cases it must be investigated whether there is a debt.
et plenius rogo quae ad haec spectant attingas: cottidiana enim sunt.
And I ask that you touch upon what pertains to these matters more fully; for they are of daily occurrence.
respondi: si is, cui Titius debebat, debitum ei remittere uoluit, nihil interest, heredem suum iussit ut eum liberaret an prohibeat eum exigere: utroque enim modo liberandus est debitor et utroque casu competit ultro ad liberandum debitori actio.
I answered: if he to whom Titius owed a debt wished to remit the debt to him, it makes no difference whether he ordered his heir to release him or forbids him to exact it; for in either way the debtor must be released, and in either case an action is available to the debtor of his own accord to secure his release.
quod si etiam centum aureorum uel fundi debiti mentionem fecit, si quidem debitor fuisse probetur, liberandus est: quod si nihil debeat, poterit dici quasi falsa demonstratione adiecta etiam peti quod comprehensum est posse.
But if he also made mention of a debt of a hundred aurei or of a tract of land, if indeed it is proved that he was a debtor, he must be released; but if he owes nothing, it could be said that what was included can even be claimed, as if a false description had been added.
sed poterit hoc dici si ita legauit: 'centum aureos, quos mihi debet' uel 'Stichum, quem debet, heres meus damnas esto non petere'.
But this could be said if he bequeathed thus: 'My heir shall be under obligation not to claim the hundred aurei which he owes me' or 'the slave Stichus whom he owes'.
quod si sic dixit: 'heres meus centum aureos, quos mihi Titius debet, damnas esto ei dare', etiam illud temptari poterit, ut petere possit quasi falsa demonstratione adiecta: quod mihi nequaquam placet, cum dandi uerbum ad debitum referre se testator existimauerit.
But if he spoke thus: 'My heir shall be under obligation to give to Titius the hundred aurei which he owes me', that other opinion could also be attempted, namely, that he can claim it as if a false description had been added; this by no means pleases me, since the testator considered himself to refer the word of 'giving' to a debt.
contra autem si debitor creditori leget, nullam utilitatem uideo, si sine quantitate leget.
Conversely, however, if a debtor bequeaths to his creditor, I see no utility if he bequeaths without a quantity.
sed et si id demonstret, quod debere se confitetur, nulla utilitas est nisi in his speciebus, in quibus emolumentum debiti ampliatur.
And even if he describes that which he confesses he owes, there is no utility except in those cases where the advantage of the debt is increased.
quod si centum aureos, quos se debere dixit, legauit, si quidem debet, inutile est legatum, quod si non fuit debitor, placuit utile esse legatum: certa enim nummorum quantitas similis est Sticho legato cum demonstratione falsa: idque et diuus Pius rescripsit certa pecunia dotis acceptae nomine legata.
But if he bequeathed the hundred aurei which he said he owed, if indeed he owes them, the bequest is useless; but if he was not a debtor, it has been held that the bequest is valid; for a certain quantity of money is similar to a bequest of Stichus with a false description; and the Divine Pius also replied by rescript to this effect when a certain sum of money was bequeathed under the title of a dowry received.