[PAULUS libro singulari ad legem Falcidiam. ] §35.2.1.prLex Falcidia lata est, quae primo capite liberam legandi facultatem dedit usque ad dodrantem his uerbis: 'qui ciues Romani sunt, qui eorum post hanc legem rogatam testamentum facere uolet, ut eam pecuniam easque res quibusque dare legare uolet, ius potestasque esto, ut hac lege sequenti licebit'. secundo capite modum legatorum constituit his uerbis: 'quicumque ciuis Romanus post hanc legem rogatam testamentum faciet, is quantam cuique ciui Romano pecuniam iure publico dare legare uolet, ius potestasque esto, dum ita detur legatum, ne minus quam partem quartam hereditatis eo testamento heredes capiant, eis, quibus quid ita datum legatumue erit, eam pecuniam sine fraude sua capere liceto isque heres, qui eam pecuniam dare iussus damnatus erit, eam pecuniam debeto dare, quam damnatus est’. §35.2.1.1Lex Falcidia etiam ad eos, qui apud hostes moriuntur, propter legem Corneliam pertinere uidetur, quod ea lex perinde eorum testamenta confirmat, atque si in ciuitate decessissent: propter quam fictionem lex Falcidia et omnes testamentariae pertinent, quae tamen possint locum habere.
The Lex Falcidia was enacted, which in its first chapter gave free power of legacy up to three-quarters in these words: 'Whoever are Roman citizens, and whoever of them wishes to make a testament after this law is proposed, shall have the right and power to give and bequeath that money and those things to whomsoever he wishes, as will be permitted by this subsequent law.' In its second chapter, it established the measure of legacies in these words: 'Whosoever Roman citizen shall make a testament after this law is proposed, whatever sum of money he wishes to give or bequeath to any Roman citizen by public law, he shall have the right and power to do so, provided that the legacy is given in such a way that the heirs do not receive less than a fourth part of the inheritance under that testament; it shall be lawful for those to whom anything is so given or bequeathed to take that money without fraud to themselves, and the heir who is ordered and condemned to give that money shall be bound to give that money which he was condemned to give.' The Lex Falcidia seems to apply also to those who die in the hands of the enemy, on account of the Lex Cornelia, because that law confirms their testaments in the same way as if they had died in the state; on account of which fiction, the Lex Falcidia and all testamentary laws apply, provided however that they can have place.
§35.2.1.2Ad eos, qui omissa causa testamenti possident hereditatem, non pertinet lex Falcidia: sed per edictum praetoris inducitur potestas legis.
The Lex Falcidia does not apply to those who possess the inheritance when the cause of the testament is abandoned; but the power of the law is introduced by the edict of the praetor.
§35.2.1.3Idemque est, si iurisiurandi condicio remissa sit.
And the same is true if the condition of an oath is remitted.
§35.2.1.4Sed et si seruo suo testator data libertate legauerit, quia differtur in id tempus, quo liber futurus est, item ei qui apud hostes est aut ei qui nondum natus est datum sit aliquid, haec lex locum habebit.
But even if the testator bequeaths to his slave after giving him freedom, because it is deferred to the time when he will be free, and likewise if something is given to one who is in the hands of the enemy or to one who is not yet born, this law will apply.
§35.2.1.5Ad municipum quoque legata uel etiam ea, quae deo relinquuntur, lex Falcidia pertinet.
The Lex Falcidia applies also to legacies of municipalities, or even to those left to a deity.
§35.2.1.6Non solum autem ad res proprias testatoris legatas, sed et alienas lex pertinet.
The law applies not only to the proper things of the testator that are bequeathed, but also to things of others.
§35.2.1.7Et omne quod ex bonis defuncti erogatur refertur ad hanc legem, siue in corpore constet certo incertoue siue pondere numero mensura ualeat aut etiam si ius legatum sit (ut usus fructus) aut quod in nominibus est.
And everything that is paid out of the assets of the deceased is referred to this law, whether it consists in a specific body, certain or uncertain, or whether its value lies in weight, number, or measure, or even if a right is bequeathed (such as a usufruct), or what is in the form of claims.
§35.2.1.8Item si ita legatum sit: 'heres meus Seio penum dato: si non dederit, decem dato', quidam putant omnimodo in legato decem esse, penum autem mortis causa capi nec in Falcidiam imputare id heredem posse.
Likewise, if it is bequeathed in this way: 'Let my heir give Seius the provisions: if he does not give them, let him give ten', some think that in any event the ten is in the legacy, while the provisions are taken by cause of death and the heir cannot impute this to the Falcidian law.
ego autem didici, si in continenti heres penum soluerit, uideri hoc legatum esse et in legem Falcidiam imputari posse: et quod dixi 'in continenti' itas accipiendum cum aliquo spatio.
But I have learned that if the heir pays the provisions immediately, this is considered a legacy and can be imputed to the Lex Falcidia; and what I said 'immediately' is to be understood with some interval of time.
quod si iam mora facta soluerit heres penum, tunc nec legatum eum accepisse nec in Falcidiam imputari posse: iam enim transfusum legatum esse et decem deberi.
But if the heir pays the provisions after delay has already occurred, then he has neither received a legacy nor can it be imputed to the Falcidian law; for the legacy has already been transferred and the ten is owed.
idemque erit et si ab initio ita legatum datum sit: 'si penum non dederit, decem dato', quia hic penus non est legata et penus si datur, mortis causa capitur, quia deficit legati condicio.
And the same will hold if the legacy is given from the beginning in this way: 'If he does not give the provisions, let him give ten', because here the provisions are not bequeathed, and if the provisions are given, they are taken by cause of death, because the condition of the legacy fails.
§35.2.1.9Si usus fructus legatus sit (qui et diuidi potest, non sicut ceterae seruitutes indiuiduae sunt), ueteres quidem aestimandum totum usum fructum putabant et ita constituendum, quantum sit in legato.
If a usufruct is bequeathed (which can also be divided, unlike other servitudes which are indivisible), the ancients indeed thought that the whole usufruct should be valued and thus determined how much is in the legacy.
sed Aristo a ueterum opinione recessit: ait enim posse quartam partem ex eo sic ut ex corporibus retineri idque Iulianus recte probat.
But Aristo departed from the opinion of the ancients: for he says that a fourth part can be retained from it just as from bodies, and Julian rightly approves this.
sed operis serui legatis cum neque usus neque usus fructus in eo legato esse uidetur, necessaria est ueterum sententia, ut sciamus quantum est in legato, quia necessario ex omnibus, quae sint facti, pars decedere debet, nec pars operae intellegi potest.
But in the case of legacies of the services of a slave, since neither use nor usufruct seems to be in that legacy, the opinion of the ancients is necessary, so that we may know how much is in the legacy, because of necessity a part must be deducted from all things consisting in action, and a part of service cannot be understood.
immo et in usu fructu si quaeratur, quantum hic capiat, cui usus fructus datus est, quantum ad ceterorum legatorum aestimationem aut etiam huius ipsius, ne dodrantem excedat legatum, necessario ad ueterum sententiam reuertendum est.
Nay, even in a usufruct, if it is asked how much he receives to whom the usufruct is given, in relation to the valuation of other legacies or even of this very one, lest the legacy exceed three-quarters, one must of necessity return to the opinion of the ancients.