[ULPIANUS libro tertio fideicommissorum. ] §36.1.3.prMarcellus autem apud Iulianum in hac specie ita scribit: si ad heredis onus esse testator legata dixerit et heres sponte adiit hereditatem, ita debere computationem Falcidiae iniri, ac si quadringenta per fideicommissum essent relicta, trecenta uero legata, ut in septem partes trecenta diuidantur et ferat quattuor partes fideicommissarius, tres partes legatarius.
[ULPIANUS from the third book on Trusts.] Marcellus, however, writes as follows in Julian regarding this case: if the testator stated that the legacies were to be a burden on the heir, and the heir entered upon the inheritance of his own accord, the calculation under the Falcidian law must be entered into just as if four hundred had been left by way of trust, and three hundred by way of legacy, so that the three hundred is divided into seven parts, and the beneficiary of the trust takes four parts, and the legatee takes three parts.
quod si suspecta dicta sit hereditas et non sponte heres adiit et restituit, centum quidem de quadringentis, quae habiturus esset heres, resident apud fideicommissarium, in reliquis autem trecentis eadem distributio fiet, ut ex his quattuor partes habeat fideicommissarius, reliquas tres legatarius: nam iniquissimum est plus ferre legatarium ideo, quia suspecta dicta est hereditas, quam laturus esset, si sponte adita fuisset.
But if the inheritance is declared suspected and the heir did not enter upon it of his own accord but restored it, one hundred out of the four hundred, which the heir would have had, remains with the beneficiary of the trust, while in the remaining three hundred the same distribution will be made, so that the beneficiary of the trust has four parts of this, and the legatee the remaining three parts; for it is most unjust that the legatee should receive more because the inheritance was declared suspected than he would have received if it had been entered upon voluntarily.
§36.1.3.1Quod autem in suspecta hereditate dictum est, hoc idem dici potest in his testamentis, in quibus lex Falcidia locum non habet, in militis dico et si qui sunt alii.
What has been said regarding a suspected inheritance can also be said regarding those testaments in which the Falcidian law has no place—I mean that of a soldier, and if there are any others.
§36.1.3.2Item Pomponius scribit, si deductis legatis restituere quis hereditatem rogatur, quaesitum est, utrum solida legata praestanda sint et quartam ex solo fideicommisso detrahere possit, an uero et ex legatis et ex fideicommisso quartam detrahere possit? et refert Aristonem respondisse ex omnibus detrahendam, hoc est ex legatis et fideicommisso.
Likewise Pomponius writes: if anyone is requested to restore an inheritance after deducting the legacies, the question was raised whether the legacies must be paid in full and he can deduct the quarter from the trust alone, or whether he can deduct the quarter from both the legacies and the trust. And he reports that Aristo replied that it must be deducted from all, that is, from both the legacies and the trust.
§36.1.3.3Res, quae ab herede alienatae sunt, in quartam imputantur heredi.
Things which have been alienated by the heir are imputed to the quarter for the heir.
§36.1.3.4Quidam liberis suis, ex disparibus partibus institutis, datis praeceptionibus, ut ipse maximam partem patrimonii inter liberos ita diuisisset, rogauit eum, qui sine liberis decederet, portionem suam fratribus restituere.
A certain person, having appointed his children as heirs in unequal shares, with pre-legacies (praeceptiones) given so that he himself had thus divided the largest part of the patrimony among the children, requested the one who should die without children to restore his portion to his brothers.
imperator noster rescripsit praeceptiones quoque fideicommisso contineri, quia non portionem hereditariam testator commemorauit, sed simpliciter portionem: in portionem autem et praeceptiones uideri cecidisse.
Our Emperor issued a rescript that the pre-legacies are also contained in the trust, because the testator did not mention an "hereditary portion", but simply a "portion"; and the pre-legacies are deemed to fall within the term "portion".
§36.1.3.5Si is, qui rogatus fuerit hereditatem restituere, ante quaestionem de familia habitam uel tabulas aperuerit uel hereditatem adierit uel quid eorum quae senatus consulto prohibentur fecerit ac per hoc publicata fuerit hereditas, fiscus cum suis oneribus hereditatem adquirit.
If he who was requested to restore the inheritance, before the inquiry regarding the household slaves (familia) is held, either opened the tablets of the will or entered upon the inheritance or did any of those things which are prohibited by the senate's decree, and because of this the inheritance was confiscated, the imperial treasury (fiscus) acquires the inheritance with its burdens.
quare commodum quartae, quod erat habiturus heres institutus, id ad fiscum pertinet et ex Trebelliano actiones transeunt.
Therefore, the benefit of the quarter, which the appointed heir would have had, belongs to the treasury, and the actions transfer under the Trebellian decree.
sed et si prohibuerit testamentarium introducere uel testes conuenire uel mortem testatoris non defendit uel ex alia causa hereditas fisco uindicata est, acque quartae quidem commodum ad fiscum pertinebit, dodrans uero fideicommissario restitueretur.
But even if he prevented the presentation of the will or the meeting of the witnesses, or did not defend the death of the testator, or if for any other reason the inheritance was claimed by the treasury, the benefit of the quarter will likewise belong to the treasury, but three-fourths (dodrans) would be restored to the beneficiary of the trust.