[ULPIANUS libro quinquagensimo secundo ad edictum. ] §36.4.5.prIs cui legatorum fideiue commissorum nomine non cauetur missus in possessionem nunquam pro domino esse incipit.
[ULPIANUS in the fifty-second book on the Edict.] He to whom security is not provided on account of legacies or trusts, having been sent into possession, never begins to be in the position of owner.
nec tam possessio rerum ei quam custodia datur: neque enim expellendi heredem ius habet, sed simul cum co possidere iubetur, ut saltem taedio perpetuae custodiae extorqueat heredi cautionem.
Nor is possession of the things given to him so much as custody: for he does not have the right of expelling the heir, but is ordered to possess together with him, so that at least by the annoyance of perpetual custody he may extort security from the heir.
§36.4.5.1Si alius damni infecti nomine missus sit in possessionem, alius legatorum seruandorum causa, posse eum, qui legatorum seruandorum causa in possessionem missus est, etiam damni infecti satisdare: qui si satisdederit, non aliter decedere possessione debebit, quam ei cautum fuerit etiam eo nomine, quod se damni infecti obligauit.
If one person has been sent into possession on account of threatened damage, and another for the sake of preserving legacies, the one who has been sent into possession for the sake of preserving legacies can also give security for threatened damage: and if he has given security, he ought not to depart from possession otherwise than if security is provided to him also on that account, because he obligated himself for threatened damage.
§36.4.5.2Si plures legatarii mitti in possessionem desiderauerint, omnes uenire debent in possessionem: is enim qui ex causa legatorum possidet sibi, non alii possidet.
If several legatees desire to be sent into possession, all ought to come into possession: for he who possesses on account of legacies possesses for himself, not for another.
alia est causa, cum creditores rei seruandae causa mittuntur in possessionem: nam is qui possidet non sibi, sed omnibus possidet.
The case is different when creditors are sent into possession for the sake of preserving the property: for he who possesses possesses not for himself, but for all.
§36.4.5.3Qui prior missus est legatarius in possessionem, non praefertur ei qui postea mittitur: inter legatarios enim nullum ordinem obseruamus, sed simul omnes aequaliter tuemur.
A legatee who was sent into possession earlier is not preferred to one who is sent in later: for among legatees we observe no order, but we protect all together equally.
§36.4.5.4Postquam rei seruandae creditores possidere coeperunt, legatorum seruandorum gratia missus in possessionem creditoribus potior non habebitur.
After creditors have begun to possess for the sake of preserving property, one sent into possession for the sake of preserving legacies will not be held preferable to the creditors.
§36.4.5.5Qui in possessionem legatorum seruandorum causa mittitur, in possessionem quidem rerum hereditariarum omnimodo ueniet, hoc est earum quae in causa hereditaria manent: earum autem, quae in causa hereditaria non erunt, non alias mittitur, quam si dolo malo in ea causa esse desierint, nec semper, sed causa cognita.
He who is sent into possession for the sake of preserving legacies will in any case come into possession of the hereditary things, that is, of those which remain in the hereditary estate: but of those which are not in the hereditary estate, he is not sent in otherwise than if they have ceased to be in that estate by fraud, and not always, but after cause is shown.
§36.4.5.6'Bonorum' autem appellatione hae res compraehensae uidebuntur, quarum proprietas ad heredem pertinet.
By the term 'goods' (bonorum), however, those things will be seen to be comprehended whose ownership belongs to the heir.
§36.4.5.7Sed et si uectigales agri sunt et si qua pignora testatori data, in eorum quoque mittetur possessionem.
But even if there are lands subject to rent, and if any pledges were given to the testator, he will be sent into possession of those as well.
§36.4.5.8Sed et in partus ancillarum et fetus pecorum, item fructus aeque omni modo legatarius et fideicommissarius mittentur.
And also into the offspring of female slaves and the young of cattle, likewise fruits, the legatee and the beneficiary of a trust will in like manner in every way be sent.
§36.4.5.9Sed et si rem alienam defunctus bona fide emerit, in possessionem eius mittendum legatarium constat: nam et haec res in causa hereditaria est.
And even if the deceased bought another's property in good faith, it is established that the legatee must be sent into its possession: for this thing also is in the hereditary estate.
§36.4.5.10Si deposita res apud defunctum fuerit uel commodata, locum missio non habet, quia non sunt istae res hereditariae.
If a thing was deposited with the deceased or lent for use, sending into possession has no place, because those things are not hereditary.
§36.4.5.11Si ex duobus heredibus alter satisdare sit paratus, alter non, in partem eius missio locum utique habere debet.
If of two heirs one is ready to give security and the other is not, sending into possession ought by all means to take place in the share of the latter.
missi itaque legatarii impedient etiam eum, qui satisdedit, rei administratione: quare suadendum erit heredi, ut in assem satisdet, ne administratio eius impediatur.
Therefore, the legatees who have been sent in will obstruct even the one who gave security from the administration of the property: wherefore the heir should be advised to give security for the whole, lest his administration be obstructed.
§36.4.5.12Si ab impuberis substituto legata sint relicta et impubes decesserit, missio non solum in ea bona, quae testatoris fuerunt, uerum ad ea quoque, quae impubes adquisiit, locum habebit: nam haec quoque hereditaria sunt: uiuo autem impubere neque missio neque satisdatio locum habet.
If legacies were left by the substitute of an impuber and the impuber has died, sending into possession will take place not only in those goods which belonged to the testator, but also to those which the impuber acquired: for these also are hereditary: but while the impuber is alive, neither sending into possession nor giving security takes place.
§36.4.5.13Si heres non sit, a quo fideicommissum relictum est, sed alterius nominis successor, dicendum est, ut edicto locus sit et dolus eius sit aestimandus.
If he from whom a trust was left is not the heir, but a successor under another name, it must be said that there is a place for the Edict and his fraud is to be estimated.
§36.4.5.14Sed et si heredis heres sit, qui dolo fecit, aeque nocere debebit.
But even if he who acted with fraud is the heir of the heir, it ought in like manner to be prejudicial.
§36.4.5.15Dolum accipere debemus et culpam latam, sed non omnem dolum, sed qui in necem legatariorum et fideicommissariorum factus est.
By fraud we ought to understand also gross negligence, yet not every fraud, but that which was committed to the ruin of the legatees and beneficiaries of trusts.
§36.4.5.16Imperator Antoninus Augustus rescripsit certis ex causis etiam in propria bona heredis legatarios et fideicommissarios esse mittendos, si post sex menses, quam aditi pro tribunali fuerint hi quorum de ea re notio est, in satisfactione cessatum est, inde fructus percepturos, quoad uoluntati defunctorum satisfiat.
The Emperor Antoninus Augustus wrote in a rescript that for certain causes the legatees and beneficiaries of trusts must be sent even into the proper goods of the heir, if after six months since those who have jurisdiction over this matter were approached on the tribunal, there was a failure in satisfaction, so that they might receive fruits from there until the will of the deceased is satisfied.
quod remedium seruaretur et aduersus eos, qui ex qua causa fideicommisso moram faciunt.
Which remedy should be preserved also against those who for any cause delay the trust.
§36.4.5.17Satisfactionis uerbum licet latius patet, tamen ad exsoluendum legatum refertur.
Although the word 'satisfaction' (satisfactio) extends more widely, yet it refers to the payment of the legacy.
§36.4.5.18Proinde et si remissa sit satisdatio, rescriptum locum habebit, quia mora fit solutioni.
Therefore, even if giving security has been remitted, the rescript will have place, because delay is made to the payment.