[IDEM libro duodecimo epistularum. ] §35.1.112.prTales condiciones 'si monumentum' puta 'fecerint' pluribus propositae non possunt nisi in omnibus simul personis exsistere.
[THE SAME, in his twelfth book of Letters.] Such conditions, for instance, "if they build a monument," when proposed to several persons, cannot be fulfilled unless they are fulfilled in the case of all persons at the same time.
§35.1.112.1Item: 'si Symphoro et Ianuario centum Titius praestiterit, fundum ei lego'. Symphoro mortuo an legatum perisset? sed hoc quoque sic puto interpretandum ut si, dum quisque eorum uiuet, praestitisset.
Likewise: "If Titius pays one hundred to Symphorus and Ianuarius, I bequeath the land to him." If Symphorus dies, would the legacy have failed? But I think this also should be interpreted as if he had paid while each of them was alive.
sed benigna interpretatione dicendum, si non post moram Titii Symphorus decessit, debere partem dimidiam Ianuario dantem partem fundi dimidiam legatarium esse consecuturum.
However, by a favorable interpretation, it should be said that, if Symphorus did not die after a delay on Titius's part, the legatee, by paying half to Ianuarius, will obtain half of the land.
§35.1.112.2De illo quoque quaeritur: fundus quibusdam legatus est, si pecuniam certam in funus impensamque perferendi corporis in aliam regionem dedissent.
This question is also asked: a land was bequeathed to certain persons, if they gave a certain sum of money for the funeral and the expense of carrying the body to another region.
nam nisi uterque dederit, neutri est legatum, quoniam condicio nisi per utrumque expleri non potest.
For unless both of them give it, the legacy is owed to neither, since the condition cannot be fulfilled except by both.
sed haec humanius interpretari solemus, ut, cum duobus fundus legatus sit, si decem dedissent, et alteri dando partem legatum quoque debeatur.
But we are accustomed to interpret these things more humanely, so that, when a land is bequeathed to two persons, if they are to give ten, and by one of them giving his share, the legacy is also owed to him.
§35.1.112.3Priscus respondit statuliberum non utique ibi ubi pater familias decessit aut ubi ipse relictus sit aut ubi uelit, rationes reddere debere, sed interim proficisci ad eum, cui reddere debeat, utique si is rei publicae causa aberit: uerissimum est autem, ut alias aliud ex persona locoque sit aestimandum.
Priscus replied that a statuliber is not by any means obliged to render accounts at the place where the paterfamilias died, or where he himself was left, or where he wishes, but in the meantime he must go to the person to whom he must render them, especially if that person is absent on public business. However, it is most true that at different times different decisions must be made, depending on the person and the place.