[IDEM libro singulari de ambiguitatibus. ] §34.5.13.prSi is qui ducenta deposuit ita leget: 'Seio cum ducentis quae apud eum deposui trecenta lego', singulae summae separate quidem certam habent demonstrationem, coniunctione uero tali incidunt in ambiguitatem.
[THE SAME, from his single book on ambiguities.] If a person who deposited two hundred bequeaths as follows: 'I bequeath to Seius three hundred along with the two hundred which I deposited with him', the individual sums, if separate, indeed have a certain designation, but by such a conjunction they fall into ambiguity.
sed dicendum est non trecenta, sed quingenta deberi, quia duae summae iunguntur.
But it must be said that not three hundred, but five hundred are due, because the two sums are joined.
§34.5.13.1Si quis leget: 'fundum Seianum heres meus Attio cum Dione Maenii seruo dato', dubitatur quidem, Dioni quoque fundus legatus sit an Dio cum fundo legatus sit.
If anyone bequeaths as follows: 'Let my heir give the Seian estate to Attius along with Dion, the slave of Maenii', it is indeed doubted whether the estate is bequeathed to Dion as well, or whether Dion is bequeathed along with the estate.
sed magis dicendum est non solum fundum, sed etiam seruum Dionem esse legatum, maxime si nullas iustas causas habuit Dioni legandi.
But it should rather be said that not only the estate, but also the slave Dion was bequeathed, especially if the testator had no just causes for bequeathing to Dion.
§34.5.13.2Cum ita stipulationem concipimus: 'si hominem aut fundum non dederis, centum dari spondes'? utrumque est faciendum, ne stipulatio committatur, id est siue alterum siue neutrum factum sit, tenebit stipulatio.
When we formulate a stipulation as follows: 'If you do not give the slave or the land, do you promise that one hundred will be given?' both must be done so that the stipulation is not committed; that is, if either one or neither is done, the stipulation will hold.
idemque est euidenter, cum propositis specialiter pluribus rebus, quas fieri uolumus, ita stipulamur: 'si quid eorum factum non erit': ueluti 'Stichum et Damam et Erotem sisti? si quis eorum non steterit, decem dari'? necesse est enim omnes esse sistendos, ut stipulationi satisfiat.
And the same is clearly true when, having specifically proposed several things that we want to be done, we stipulate thus: 'If any of them is not done'; for example: 'That Stichus, Dama, and Eros be produced? If any of them does not appear, that ten be given?' For it is necessary that all of them be produced so that the stipulation is satisfied.
uel ut propius accedamus, fingamus ita stipulationem factam: 'si Stichum et Damam et Erotem non sisteris, decem dari'? neque enim dubitabimus, quin aeque omnes sisti oporteat.
Or, to come closer, let us imagine that a stipulation is made as follows: 'If you do not produce Stichus, Dama, and Eros, that ten be given?' For we shall not doubt that all must equally be produced.
§34.5.13.3Utrum ita concipias stipulationem 'si illud aut illud factum non erit' an hoc modo 'si quid eorum factum non erit, quae ut fierent, comprehensa sunt', hoc interest, quod, quamuis altero facto uerum sit hoc aut illud uere factum esse, non ideo tamen uerum erit hoc aut illud factum non esse.
Whether you formulate the stipulation thus: 'If this or that is not done,' or in this manner: 'If any of those things is not done, which were included to be done,' there is this difference: that although, upon one of them being done, it is true that 'this or that was truly done,' yet it will not therefore be true that 'this or that was not done.' For those statements can be true at the same time, although they are contrary to each other, because when the meaning is taken not from the whole, but from a part, if there is anything true therein, it makes the whole statement true.
nam simul ea possunt esse uera, quamuis inter se contraria sunt, quia cum significatio non ex uniuerso, sed ex aliquo sumitur, si ueri aliquid inde sit, ueram efficit totam orationem: sicut e contrario duae orationes pugnantia continentes simul falsae sunt, ueluti si qui liberorum partim puberes, partim impuberes decesserint, nam et hoc falsum erit omnes impuberes decessisse et illud omnes puberes decessisse. id accidit, quia significatio sumitur ex uniuerso, in quo si aliquid falsum est, totam orationem falsam efficit.
Just as, on the contrary, two statements containing conflicting things are false at the same time, for example, if some of the children died as adults and some as minors; for both this will be false, that 'all died as minors,' and that, that 'all died as adults.' This happens because the meaning is taken from the whole, in which if anything is false, it makes the whole statement false.
animaduertendum igitur est, quid sit, de quo quaeritur.
Therefore, attention must be paid to what is in question.
nam cum ita concipio 'si illud aut illud non fuerit', quaeri debet, an aliquid factum non sit: illius effectus hic est, ut neutrum fiat, huius autem, ut utrumque fiat: nec in illo prodest aliquid non fecisse, si aliquid factum sit, neque in hoc aliquid fecisse, si aliquid factum non sit.
For when I formulate 'If this or that has not been,' it must be asked whether something was not done: the effect of the former is that neither is done, and of the latter, that both are done: and in the former case, it is of no avail to have not done something, if something has been done, nor in the latter to have done something, if something has not been done.
§34.5.13.4Proinde si quis ita interroget: 'eorum quid, quae obiciuntur tibi, fecisti'? ille neget, hoc exprimat: 'eorum quid, quae obiciuntur, non feci', id est 'nihil horum feci'. §34.5.13.5Si quis autem plura in stipulatum deducat, quorum unum fieri uelit, ita comprehendere debet: 'illud aut illud fieri spondes? si nihil eorum factum erit, tantum dabis'?
Accordingly, if anyone should ask: 'Did you do any of those things which are charged against you?' and he should deny it, let him express it thus: 'I did not do any of those things which are charged against me,' that is, 'I did none of these things.' But if anyone introduces several things into a stipulation, wishing one of them to be done, he ought to express it thus: 'Do you promise that this or that will be done?
§34.5.13.6Item si pater familias in testamento ita scripserit: 'si quis mihi filius aut filia genitur, heres mihi esto: si mihi filius aut filia heres non erit, Seius heres esto', non satis uoluntatem suam declarauit, si non aliter extraneum heredem esse uolet, quam si neque filius neque filia heres sit: hoc enim modo concipi oportet: 'si mihi neque filius neque filia heres erit'. potest autem interdum superior scriptura esse necessaria, si quis, cum filium et filiam habeat, utrumque heredem instituere uelit, sed siue alter heres futurus sit, extraneum miscere, siue neuter, extraneum substituere.
If none of them is done, will you give so much?' Likewise, if a paterfamilias wrote in his will as follows: 'If any son or daughter is born to me, let them be my heir; if a son or daughter is not my heir, let Seius be my heir,' he has not sufficiently declared his intention, if he does not wish an outside heir to be established otherwise than if neither a son nor a daughter is the heir; for it ought to be formulated in this manner: 'If neither a son nor a daughter is my heir.' Sometimes, however, the former writing can be necessary, if someone, having both a son and a daughter, wishes to institute both as heirs, but if either one is to be the heir, to mix in an outsider, or if neither, to substitute an outsider.
sed procliuior est sententia testatoris sic esse interpretanda 6, ut, siue filius siue filia nati ei fuerint, extraneus non admittatur, nisi specialiter hoc testator expresserit.
But the more favorable opinion is that the testator's intention should be interpreted in such a way that, whether a son or a daughter is born to him, the outsider is not admitted, unless the testator has specifically expressed this.