[ULPIANUS libro quarto fideicommissorum. ] §36.1.17.prcogi poterit: hoc idem et si 'patrimonium' fuerit rogatus et si 'facultates' et si 'quidquid habeo' et si 'censum meum' et si 'fortunas meas' et si 'substantiam meam'. et si 'peculium meum' testator dixerit, quia plerique ὑποκοριστικῶς patrimonium suum peculium dicunt, cogendus erit: de successione enim sua et hic rogauit.
[ULPIANUS libro quarto fideicommissorum.] he can be compelled; and the same applies if he has been requested to restore "patrimony," or "means," or "whatever I have," or "my assessment," or "my fortunes," or "my substance." Even if the testator said "my peculium," since most people use "peculium" hypocoristically for their patrimony, he must be compelled; for here too the testator has requested concerning his own succession.
nec ignoro in quibusdam ex his Maccianum dubitare et uoluntatis esse dicere quaestionem, utrum de pecunia tantum an et de successione testator sensit.
Nor am I unaware that in some of these cases Maecianus has doubts and says it is a question of intention, whether the testator meant only money or also the succession.
in ambiguo tamen magis de successione sensum dico, ne intercidat fideicommissum.
In case of doubt, however, I say he rather meant the succession, lest the trust should fail.
§36.1.17.1Sed et si quis ita rogauerit: 'quidquid ad te ex hereditate bonisue meis peruenerit, rogo restituas', cogi poterit adire et restituere hereditatem ex Trebelliano senatus consulto, quamquam peruenire proprie dicatur quod deductis oneribus ad aliquem peruenit.
But even if someone has requested thus: "Whatever shall come to you from my inheritance or goods, I ask you to restore," he can be compelled to enter upon and restore the inheritance under the Trebellian senatusconsult, although "to come" is properly said of what comes to someone after liabilities have been deducted.
§36.1.17.2Et generaliter autem potest dici ita demum quem non posse cogi adire et restituere hereditatem, si de re uel quantitate fuerit rogatus: ceterum si de uniuersitate sensisse testatorem appareat, nulla quaestio est, quin, siue suspectam dicat, cogi possit, siue sponte adit, ex Trebelliano transeant actiones.
And generally indeed it can be said that someone cannot be compelled to enter upon and restore an inheritance only if he has been requested concerning a specific thing or quantity; but if it appears that the testator meant the entirety, there is no question but that, whether he says it is suspect, he can be compelled, or if he enters voluntarily, the actions pass under the Trebellian senatusconsult.
§36.1.17.3Inde quaeritur, si quis hereditatem rogatus sit restituere deducto aere alieno uel deductis legatis, an suspectam dicens cogi possit adire et restituere hereditatem, quia ui ipsa magis id, quod superest ex hereditate, quam ipsam hereditatem restituere sit rogatus.
Hence it is asked, if someone is requested to restore an inheritance after deducting debts or legacies, whether, on saying it is suspect, he can be compelled to enter upon and restore the inheritance, because by its very nature he is requested to restore the residue of the inheritance rather than the inheritance itself.
et sunt qui putent, ut Maecianus, inutilem esse hanc deductionem: nec enim posse ex iure deduci quantitatem, non magis quam si fundum quis deducto aere alieno uel deductis legatis restituere sit rogatus: neque enim recipit fundus aeris alieni uel legati minutionem.
And there are some, like Maecianus, who think that this deduction is ineffectual; for a quantity cannot be deducted by law, any more than if someone were requested to restore land after deducting debts or legacies, since land does not admit of diminution by debts or legacies.
sed Iulianum existimare refert Trebelliano senatus consulto locum esse et, ne dupliciter fideicommissarius oneretur, et cum heres aes alienum uel legatum deducit et cum conuenitur a creditoribus et legatariis, restituta sibi ex Trebelliano hereditate debere aut deductionem eum non pati ab herede aut cauere illi heredem defensum iri eum aduersus legatarios ceterosque.
But it is reported that Julian thought the Trebellian senatusconsult has a place, and, lest the beneficiary of the trust be doubly burdened—both when the heir deducts the debt or legacy, and when he is sued by creditors and legatees—once the inheritance has been restored to him under the Trebellian senatusconsult, he either ought not to suffer deduction by the heir, or the heir must give security that he will be defended against the legatees and others.
§36.1.17.4Si quis heres institutus rogatus fuerit hereditatem non totam, sed partem restituere, uel si duobus restituere sit rogatus et alter ex his uelit sibi restitui hereditatem, alter recuset: senatus censuit utroque casu exonerari eum, qui suspectam hereditatem dicit, totamque hereditatem transire ad eum, qui adire cogit.
If an appointed heir has been requested to restore not the whole but a part of the inheritance, or if he has been requested to restore it to two persons and one of them wishes the inheritance to be restored to himself, while the other refuses: the senate resolved that in both cases he who says the inheritance is suspect is exonerated, and the whole inheritance passes to the one who compels the entry.
§36.1.17.5Sed et si quis non hereditatis suae partem dimidiam rogauit heredem suum restituere, sed hereditatem Seiae, quae ad eum peruenerat, uel totam uel partem eius, heresque institutus suspectam dicat, cum placeat illud quod Papinianus ait ex Trebelliano transire actiones, dici poterit, si suspecta dicatur hereditas, cogendum heredem institutum adire et restituere hereditatem totamque hereditatem ad eum cui restituitur pertinere.
But also if someone has requested his heir to restore not a half part of his own inheritance, but the inheritance of Seia, which had come to him, either the whole or a part of it, and the appointed heir says it is suspect; since the opinion which Papinian states, that actions pass under the Trebellian senatusconsult, is accepted, it can be said that, if the inheritance is said to be suspect, the appointed heir must be compelled to enter upon and restore the inheritance, and the whole inheritance belongs to him to whom it is restored.
§36.1.17.6Sed et si miles rogauerit quem res Italicas restituere uel res prouinciales, dicendum est suspectam dicentem cogi adire et restituere: nam, ut eleganter Maecianus libro sexto fideicommissorum ait, qua ratione ex certa re miles heredem instituere potest actionesque ei dabuntur, pari ratione etiam ex Trebelliano transibunt actiones: et quamuis placeat, cum quis hereditatem bonaque, quae sibi ab aliquo obuenerunt uel quae in aliqua regione habet, restituere rogat, ex Trebelliano non transeant actiones, tamen contra responderi in militis testamento ait: nam sicuti concessum est, inquit, militibus circa institutionem separare species bonorum, ita et, si per fideicommissum ab institutis heredibus id fecerit, admitteretur Trebellianum senatus consultum.
But also if a soldier has requested someone to restore Italian property or provincial property, it must be said that he who says it is suspect can be compelled to enter upon and restore it; for, as Maecianus elegantly says in the sixth book on trusts, by the same reasoning that a soldier can appoint an heir to a specific thing and actions will be given to him, by the same reasoning actions will also pass under the Trebellian senatusconsult. And although it is accepted that, when someone requests to restore an inheritance and goods which have come to him from someone or which he has in some region, actions do not pass under the Trebellian senatusconsult, yet he says a contrary answer must be given in the case of a soldier's testament; for just as it is permitted, he says, to soldiers to separate classes of property in their appointment of heirs, so also, if he has done this through a trust by the appointed heirs, the Trebellian senatusconsult should be admitted.
§36.1.17.7Cum quidam duos heredes instituerit eosque inuicem substituerit et ab his petierit, siue uterque siue alter heres esset, ut hereditas sua ex parte dimidia restitueretur alicui post quinquennium, et scripti suspectam sibi hereditatem dicant, fideicommissarius autem desideret suo periculo adiri hereditatem: censuit senatus ambos heredes alterumue cogi adire hereditatem et fideicommissario eam restituere ita, ut fideicommissario et aduersus eum actiones competant quasi ex Trebelliano restituta hereditate.
When someone appointed two heirs and substituted them reciprocally, and requested of them that, whether both or one should be heir, his inheritance should be restored to someone to the extent of a half part after five years, and those written as heirs say the inheritance is suspect to them, while the beneficiary of the trust desires the inheritance to be entered upon at his own risk: the senate resolved that both heirs or one of them must be compelled to enter upon the inheritance and restore it to the beneficiary, so that actions may be competent both to and against the beneficiary of the trust just as if the inheritance had been restored under the Trebellian senatusconsult.