[ULPIANUS libro trigensimo octauo ad edictum. ] §47.4.1.8'Ante aditam hereditatem' sic accipere debemus 'antequam uel ab uno adeatur hereditas': nam ubi uel unus adit, competit libertas.
[ULPIANUS on the Edict, book 38.] We must understand 'before the acceptance of the inheritance' as 'before the inheritance is accepted even by one person'; for once even one person accepts, freedom is acquired.
§47.4.1.9Si pupillus heres institutus sit et a substituto eius libertas data medioque tempore quaedam admittantur: si quidem uivo pupillo quid fuerit factum, locum non esse huic actioni: sin uero post mortem, antequam quis pupillo succederet, actionem istam locum habere.
If an impuber has been instituted heir and freedom has been given by his substitute, and in the intervening time some offenses are committed: if indeed anything was done while the impuber was alive, there is no room for this action; but if after his death, before anyone succeeds the impuber, this action has room.
§47.4.1.10Haec actio locum habet non tantum in rebus, quae in bonis fuerunt testatoris, sed et si heredis interfuit dolum malum admissum non esse, quo minus ad se perueniret.
This action applies not only to things which were in the estate of the testator, but also if it was in the interest of the heir that no bad faith should be committed so as to prevent something from reaching him.
et ideo Scaeuola plenius tractat et si eam rem subripuisset seruus, quam defunctus pignori acceperat, hanc actionem honorariam locum habere: plenius enim causam bonorum hic accipimus pro utilitate.
And therefore Scaevola treats it more broadly, holding that even if the slave had stolen a thing which the deceased had received as a pledge, this praetorian action applies; for we interpret the scope of 'property' here more broadly for the sake of utility.
nam si in locum deficientis furti actionis propter seruitutem hanc actionem substituit praetor, uerisimile est in omnibus causis eum, in quibus furti agi potuit, substituisse.
For if the praetor substituted this action in place of the theft action which was lacking because of the slave status, it is probable that he substituted it in all cases in which an action for theft could have been brought.
et in summa probatur hanc actionem et in rebus pigneratis et in rebus alienis bona fide possessis locum habere: idem et de re commodata testatori.
And in short, it is approved that this action applies both to pledged things and to others' things possessed in good faith; the same is also true of a thing lent to the testator.
§47.4.1.11Item si fructus post mortem testatoris perceptos hic seruus, qui libertatem prospicit, contrectauerit, locus erit huic actioni: sed et si partus uel fetus post mortem adgnatos, tantundem erit dicendum.
Likewise, if this slave, who anticipates his freedom, has handled fruits gathered after the death of the testator, there will be room for this action; but the same must also be said if he did so to offspring of slaves or animals born after the death.
§47.4.1.12Praeterea si impubes post mortem patris quaesierit rei dominium eaque, antequam impuberis hereditas adeatur, subripiatur, locum habere istam actionem dicendum est.
Furthermore, if an impuber has acquired the ownership of a thing after his father's death and it is stolen before the inheritance of the impuber is accepted, it must be said that this action applies.
§47.4.1.13Sed et in omnibus, quae interfuit heredis non esse auersa, locum habet haec actio.
But also, in all things which it was in the interest of the heir not to be embezzled, this action applies.
§47.4.1.14Non tantum autem ad sola furta ista actio pertinet, sed etiam ad omnia damna, quaecumque hereditati seruus dedit.
Moreover, this action pertains not only to theft alone, but also to all damages whatsoever which the slave caused to the inheritance.
§47.4.1.15Scaeuola ait possessionis furtum fieri: denique si nullus sit possessor, furtum negat fieri: idcirco autem hereditati furtum non fieri, quia possessionem hereditas non habet, quae facti est et animi.
Scaevola says that theft is committed against possession; consequently, if there is no possessor, he denies that theft is committed. And for this reason theft is not committed against an inheritance, because an inheritance does not have possession, which is a matter of fact and of mind.
sed nec heredis est possessio, antequam possideat, quia hereditas in eum id tantum transfundit, quod est hereditatis, non autem fuit possessio hereditatis.
Nor indeed does the possession belong to the heir before he actually possesses, because the inheritance transfers to him only what belongs to the inheritance, but possession was not a part of the inheritance.
§47.4.1.16Illud uerum est, si potest alias heres ad suum peruenire, non esse honorariam hanc actionem tribuendam, cum in id quod intersit condemnatio fiat.
It is true that if the heir can attain his own by other means, this praetorian action should not be granted, since the condemnation is made for the amount of his interest.
§47.4.1.17Praeter hanc actionem esse et uindicationem rei constat, cum haec actio ad similitudinem furti competat.
It is established that besides this action there is also a vindication of the thing, since this action is available in likeness of a theft action.
§47.4.1.18Item heredi ceterisque successoribus competere istam actionem dicendum est.
Likewise, it must be said that this action is available to the heir and other successors.
§47.4.1.19Si plures serui libertatem acceperunt et dolo malo quid admiserint, singuli conuenientur in solidum, hoc est in duplum.
If several slaves have received freedom and have committed some offense with bad faith, each of them shall be sued for the whole, that is, for double value.
et cum ex delicto conueniantur, exemplo furti nullus eorum liberatur, etsi unus conuentus praestiterit.
And since they are sued on the basis of a delict, in the likeness of theft, none of them is released, even if one who was sued has made payment.