[ULPIANUS libro sexto disputationum. ] §34.5.10.prSi fuerit legatum relictum ex cognatis meis qui primus Capitolium ascenderit, si simul duo uenisse dicantur nec apparet, quis prior uenerit, an impedietur legatum? uel ei qui monumentum fecerit, et plures fecerint? uel ei qui maximus natu est, et duo pares aetate sint? sed et si legatum Sempronio amico fuerit relictum, et duo sint aequa caritate coniuncti? sed et si duobus hominibus eiusdem nominis fuerit legatum, puta Semproniis, mox Sempronio ademptum sit nec appareat, cui ademptum sit: utrum datio in utriusque persona infringitur an ademptio nulla est, quaeri potest.
[ULPIANUS, in the sixth book of Disputations.] If a legacy has been left to whichever of my cognates climbs the Capitol first, and if two are said to have arrived at the same time and it does not appear which one arrived first, will the legacy be impeded? Or to the one who builds a monument, and several have built it? Or to the one who is oldest, and two are of equal age? But also, if a legacy has been left to my friend Sempronius, and there are two joined by equal affection? But also, if a legacy has been left to two men of the same name, say to Semproniuses, and afterwards it has been revoked from 'Sempronius', and it does not appear from whom it was revoked: it can be asked whether the giving is invalidated in the person of both, or whether the revocation is null.
item si ex pluribus seruis eiusdem nominis uni uel quibusdam libertas relicta est.
Likewise, if out of several slaves of the same name, freedom has been left to one or to certain ones.
et uerius est in his omnibus etiam legata et libertates impediri, ademptionem autem in utrumque ualere.
And it is more correct that in all these cases both the legacies and freedoms are impeded, but the revocation is valid against both.
§34.5.10.1Plane si ita libertatem acceperit ancilla: 'si primum marem pepererit, libera esto' et haec uno utero marem et feminam peperisset: si quidem certum est, quid prius edidisset, non debet de ipsius statu ambigi, utrum libera esset nec ne, sed nec filiae: nam si postea edita est, erit ingenua.
Clearly, if a female slave has received freedom in this way: 'If she first gives birth to a male, let her be free', and she has given birth to a male and a female from one womb: if indeed it is certain which she had brought forth first, there ought to be no doubt about her own status, whether she is free or not, nor about her daughter's; for if the daughter was brought forth afterwards, she will be freeborn.
sin autem hoc incertum est nec potest nec per suptilitatem iudicialem manifestari, in ambiguis rebus humaniorem sententiam sequi oportet, ut tam ipsa libertatem consequatur quam filia eius ingenuitatem, quasi per praesumptionem priore masculo edito.
But if this is uncertain and cannot be made manifest even by judicial scrutiny, in ambiguous matters it is proper to follow the more humane opinion, so that she herself obtains her freedom as well as her daughter her freeborn status, as if by presumption the male had been born first.