De instructo vel instrumento legato
(Concerning Legacies of Equipment or Implements.)
1 Paulus libro quarto ad Sabinum. Sive cum instrumento fundus legatus est sive instructus, duo legata intelleguntur. 1Fundo cum instrumento legato et alienato instrumentum non vindicabitur ex sententia defuncti.
1 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book IV. Where a tract of land furnished with everything is devised, or where it is devised with its equipment, two separate and distinct legacies are understood to have been left. 1Where land is devised with its equipment, and it has been alienated, the equipment cannot be recovered in accordance with the will of the deceased.
2 Papinianus libro septimo responsorum. Cum pater pluribus filiis heredibus scriptis duobus praeceptionem bonorum aviae praeter partes hereditarias dedisset, pro partibus coheredum viriles habituros legatarios placuit. 1Dotes praediorum, quae Graeco vocabulo ἐνθῆκαι appellantur, cum non instructa legantur, legatario non praestantur.
2 Papinianus, Opinions, Book VII. Where a father, after having appointed several of his children his heirs, bequeathed to two of them, as a preferred legacy, the property of their grandmother, in addition to their shares of his own estate; it was held that the legatees would be entitled to equal shares in proportion to those of the co-heirs. 1Gifts of land, when the implements for its cultivation, called envykai in the Greek language, are not left with it, are not delivered to the devisee.
3 Idem libro octavo responsorum. Fundum instructum libertis patronus testamento legavit: postea codicillis petit, ut morientes partes suas fundi superstitibus restituerent, nec instructi mentionem habuit. talem in causam fideicommissi deductum videri placuit, qualis fuerat legatus, sed medii temporis augmenta fetuum et partuum, item detrimenta fatalium fideicommisso contineri. 1Minor viginti annis instructa praedia consobrinae suae dari voluit et quosdam servos praediorum vivus manumisit. non idcirco servi manumissi praestabuntur, quod ad libertatem pervenire non possunt. idem iuris est, cum ex quavis alia causa libertas non competit.
3 The Same, Opinions, Book VIII. A patron left a tract of land, with its equipment, to his freedmen by his will, and he afterwards requested in a codicil that the legatees, at their death, should give their shares of the land to the survivors; but he did not make any mention of the equipment. It was held that the land which was devised should be considered just as if it had been left under a trust; but that the increase of animals and slaves which took place in the meantime, as well as the losses caused by death, should be included in the trust. 1A minor of twenty years of age desired a tract of land with all its equipment to be given to his female cousin, and, during his lifetime, manumitted certain slaves who were attached to said land. The manumitted slaves should not be delivered to the legatee, although they cannot obtain their freedom under such circumstances. The same rule of law applies where freedom is not obtained for any other reason whatsoever.
4 Iavolenus libro secundo ex posterioribus Labeonis. Cum quidam duos fundos iunctos haberet et ex altero boves, cum opus fecissent, in alterum reverterentur, utrumque fundum cum instrumento legaverat. Labeo Trebatius boves ei fundo cessuros putant, ubi opus fecissent, non ubi manere consuevissent: Cascellius contra. Labeonis sententiam probo.
4 Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book II. A certain testator had two adjoining tracts of land, and the oxen used on one tract, after the work there was completed, were then removed to the other. He bequeathed both tracts, with all the equipment. Labeo and Trebatius think that the oxen ought to belong to the land where they worked, and not where they were accustomed to remain. Cascellius holds the contrary opinion. I adopt the view of Labeo.
5 Labeo libro primo πιϑανῶν a Paulo epitomatorum. Si cui fundum et instrumentum eius legare vis, nihil interest, quomodo leges ‘fundum cum instrumento’ an ‘fundum et instrumentum’ an ‘fundum instructum’. Paulus. immo contra: nam inter ea legata hoc interest, quod, si fundo alienato mortuus fuerit qui ita legavit, ex hac scriptura ‘fundum cum instrumento’ nihil erit legatum, ex ceteris poterit instrumentum esse legatum.
5 Labeo, Abridgment of Probabilities by Paulus, Book I. If you wish to devise to anyone a tract of land with its equipment it makes no difference what form you use, whether you devise the land with its equipment or the land and its equipment, or the land furnished with its equipment. Paulus: I indeed am of the contrary opinion, for there is this difference between legacies, namely, if the testator who made the devise should employ the following form, “I leave the land with its equipment,” and the land should be alienated, the devise will be of no force or effect; but if he used either of the other forms it will be valid.
6 Scaevola libro sexto decimo digestorum. Nepoti legaverat quae certa regione praedia habuerat ut instructa sunt, cum vino grano calendario, et adiecerat haec verba: ‘quidquid erit cum moriar in illa regione, et quidquid in quacumque specie erit in illa regione, vel quod meum erit’. viva testatrice unus ex debitoribus condemnatus vivente testatrice satis non fecit: quaesitum est, an quod ex sententia iudicis deberetur ad nepotem pertineret. respondit nihil proponi, cur non deberetur.
6 Scævola, Digest, Book XVI. A testatrix left to her grandson the lands which she possessed in a certain district, as they were equipped, together with the wine, grain, and a book of accounts; and added the following words: “Everything to be found in that district, when I die, and all property of every description which is there, or which may belong to me.” Judgment having been taken against one of her debtors, during the lifetime of the testatrix, he did not satisfy it. The question arose whether what was due under the decision of the court would belong to the grandson. The answer was that there was nothing in the case stated to prevent his being entitled to it.
7 Idem libro vicesimo secundo digestorum. Tabernam cum caenaculo Pardulae manumisso testamento legaverat cum mercibus et instrumentis et suppellectili quae ibi esset, item horreum vinarium cum vino et vasis et instrumento et institoribus, quos secum habere consueverat. quaesitum est, cum vivo testatore insula, in qua caenaculum fuit quod ei legatum erat, exusta sit, et post biennium eodem loco constituta nova, et horreum, quod eidem legatum erat, a testatore venierit, vini autem venditio dilata sit, ut ex eo commodo venirent, an universa legata Pardula consequi possit. respondit ea, in quibus voluntas mutata esset, non deberi.
7 The Same, Digest, Book XXII. A certain person left to Pardula, whom he had manumitted by his will, a shop and an apartment, together with the merchandise utensils and furniture contained therein, and also a warehouse for wine, along with the wine, vessels, utensils, and slaves in charge of the same, which he had been accustomed to have with him. The question arose whether Pardula could claim the entire legacy, as the house which contained the apartment that had been devised was burned during the lifetime of the testator, and had been rebuilt in the same place, after the lapse of two years, and the warehouse which had been left to the same party had been disposed of by the testator, but the sale of the wine had been deferred in order to obtain a higher price. The answer was that that portion of it with reference to which the testator had changed his mind was not due.
8 Ulpianus libro vicesimo ad Sabinum. In instrumento fundi ea esse, quae fructus quaerendi cogendi conservandi gratia parata sunt, Sabinus libris ad Vitellium evidenter enumerat. quaerendi, veluti homines qui agrum colunt, et qui eos exercent praepositive sunt is, quorum in numero sunt vilici et monitores: praeterea boves Domiti, et pecora stercorandi causa parata, vasaque utilia culturae, quae sunt aratra ligones sarculi falces putatoriae bidentes et si qua similia dici possunt. cogendi, quemadmodum torcularia corbes falcesque messoriae falces fenariae quali vindemiatorii exceptoriique, in quibus uvae comportantur. conservandi, quasi dolia, licet defossa non sint, et cuppae. 1Quibusdam in regionibus accedunt instrumento, si villa cultior est, veluti atrienses scoparii, si etiam virdiaria sint, topiarii, si fundus saltus pastionesque habet, greges pecorum pastores saltuarii.
8 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XX. Sabinus says clearly in his works on Vitellius that everything is included in the equipment of land which is used for procuring, gathering, and preserving the crops. For instance, in order to procure the latter some slaves are employed to cultivate the soil, and others are placed in charge of them to compel them to labor, and among the latter are the stewards and overseers, and, in addition, are oxen, broken to work, and flocks provided for manuring the ground, and implements and utensils for cultivation, such as plows, hoes, weeding hooks, pruning knives, forks, and other tools of this kind. For the purpose of gathering the crops, implements such as presses, baskets, sickles for cutting grain, scythes for mowing hay, baskets in which grapes are picked and carried, are included. For preserving the crops, casks, for example, even though they may not be buried in the ground, and vats, are used. 1In some districts, for instance, if a farmhouse is of the better class, there are added, as accessories, slaves who are porters, and floor-cleaners; and if there are pleasure-gardens, gardeners. If the land has woods and pastures, droves of cattle and their shepherds and foresters are included.
9 Paulus libro quarto ad Sabinum. De grege ovium ita distinguendum est, ut, si ideo comparatus sit, ut ex eo fructus caperetur, non debeatur: si vero ideo, quia non aliter ex saltu fructus percipi poterit, contra erit, quia per greges fructus ex saltu percipiuntur.
9 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book IV. With reference to flocks of sheep, the following distinction must be observed, namely, that if they were kept in order to obtain the profits from them, they will not be due under the legacy; but this will not be the case if the profits of the woodland cannot otherwise be acquired, as these profits are obtained therefrom by means of flocks of sheep.
10 Ulpianus libro vicesimo ad Sabinum. Si reditus etiam ex melle constat, alvei apesque continentur.
10 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XX. If the income of the land also consists of honey, the bees and their hives will be included.
11 Javolenus, On Cassius, Book II. The same rule applies to birds which are kept in houses near the sea.
12 Ulpianus libro vicesimo ad Sabinum. Quaesitum est, an frumentum, quod cibariis cultorum paratum foret, instrumento cederet. et plurimis non placet, quia consumeretur: quippe instrumentum est apparatus rerum diutius mansurarum, sine quibus exerceri nequiret possessio: accedit eo, quod cibaria victus magis quam colendi causa pararentur. sed ego puto et frumentum et vinum ad cibaria paratum instrumento contineri: et ita Servium respondisse auditores eius referunt. item nonnullis visum est frumentum, quod serendi causa sepositum est, instrumento contineri, puto quia et instar culturae esset et ita consumitur, ut semper reponeretur: sed causa seminis nihil a cibariis differt. 1Conservandi fructus causa, veluti granaria, quia in his fructus custodiuntur, urceos capsellas, in quibus fructus componuntur: sed et ea, quae exportandorum fructuum causa parantur, instrumenti esse constat, veluti iumenta et vehicula et naves et cuppae et culei. 2Alfenus autem, si quosdam ex hominibus aliis legaverit, ceteros, qui in fundo fuerunt, non contineri instrumento ait, quia nihil animalis instrumenti esse opinabatur: quod non est verum: constat enim eos, qui agri gratia ibi sunt, instrumento contineri. 3Quaeritur, an servus, qui quasi colonus in agro erat, instrumento legato contineatur. et Labeo et Pegasus recte negaverunt, quia non pro instrumento in fundo fuerat, etiamsi solitus fuerat et familiae imperare. 4Saltuarium autem Labeo quidem putat eum demum contineri, qui fructuum servandorum gratia paratus sit, eum non, qui finium custodiendorum causa: sed Neratius etiam hunc, et hoc iure utimur, ut omnes saltuarii contineantur. 5Trebatius amplius etiam pistorem et tonsorem, qui familiae rusticae causa parati sunt, putat contineri, item fabrum, qui villae reficiendae causa paratus sit, et mulieres quae panem coquant quaeque villam servent: item molitores, si ad usum rusticum parati sunt: item focariam et vilicam, si modo aliquo officio virum adiuvet: item lanificas quae familiam rusticam vestiunt, et quae pulmentaria rusticis coquant. 6Sed an instrumenti instrumentum legato instrumento continetur, quaeritur: haec enim, quae rusticorum causa parantur, lanificae et lanae et tonsores et fullones et focariae non agri sunt instrumentum, sed instrumenti. puto igitur etiam [ed. maior focariam] <ed. minor focarium> contineri: sed et lanificas et ceteros, qui supra enumerati sunt: et ita Servium respondisse auditores eius referunt. 7Uxores quoque et infantes eorum, qui supra enumerati sunt, credendum est in eadem villa agentes voluisse testatorem legato contineri: neque enim duram separationem iniunxisse credendus est. 8Si aliqua parte anni in fundo pascantur pecora, aliqua parte his pabulum conducitur, vel servi, si aliqua parte anni per eos ager colitur, aliqua parte in mercedem mittuntur, nihilo minus instrumento continentur. 9Cellararium quoque, id est ideo praepositum, ut rationes salvae sint, item ostiarium mulionemque instrumenti esse constat. 10Et molas et machinas, fenum stipulas, asinum machinarium, machinam frumentariam, vas aeneum, in quo sapa coqueretur et defrutum fiat et aqua ad bibendum lavandamque familiam paratur, instrumenti esse, et cribra, et plaustra quibus stercus evehatur. 11Ea vero, quae solo continentur, instrumenti fundi non esse Cassius scribit, veluti harundineta et salicta, antequam caesa sint, quia fundus fundi instrumentum esse non potest: sed si caesa sint, puto contineri, quia quaerendo fructui deserviunt. idem et in palis erit dicendum. 12Si in agro venationes sint, puto venatores quoque et vestigatores et canes et cetera quae ad venationem sunt necessaria instrumento contineri, maxime si ager et ex hoc reditum habuit. 13Et si ab aucupio reditus fuit, aucupes et plagae et huius rei instrumentum agri instrumento continebitur: nec mirum, cum et aves instrumento exemplo apium contineri Sabinus et Cassius putaverunt. 14Si quis eodem instrumento in plurimis agris utatur, cuius agri sit instrumentum, quaeritur. et ego arbitror, si quidem apparet voluntas patris familiae, cui potius agro destinaverat, eius esse instrumentum: ceteri enim agri ab hoc agro veluti mutuantur: si non appareat, nullius instrumento cedet: neque enim pro parte dividemus instrumentum. 15Supellex ceteraque, si qua in agro fuerunt, quo instructior esset pater familias, instrumento fundi non continentur. 16Si domus sit instrumentum legatum, videndum quid contineatur. et Pegasus ait instrumentum domus id esse, quod tempestatis arcendae aut incendii causa paratur, non quod voluptatis gratia: itaque neque specularia neque vela quae frigoris causa vel umbrae in domo sunt deberi. quae sententia Cassii fuit, qui dicebat inter instrumentum et ornamentum multum interesse: instrumenti enim ea esse, quae ad tutelam domus pertinent, ornamenti, quae ad voluntatem, sicuti tabulas pictas. 17Vela autem Cilicia instrumenti esse Cassius, quae ideo parantur, ne aedificia vento vel pluvia laborent. 18Acetum quoque, quod exstinguendi incendii causa paratur, item centones sifones, perticae quoque et scalae, et formiones et spongias et amas et scopas contineri plerique et Pegasus aiunt. 19Tegulam autem et tignum eius rei causa paratum instrumento contineri, si ad huiusmodi causam habeat tigna parata ad alios usus non deservientia. proinde et fulcimenta si qua habebat huic rei necessaria, etiam ea instrumento domus continebuntur. 20De velis, quae in hypaethris extenduntur, item de his, quae sunt circa columnas, Celsus scribit magis suppellectili adnumeranda et ita Sabinum et Cassium putare. 21Canales autem et harpagones et amas instrumento contineri constat. 22Item perticae, quibus araneae detergantur, item spongiae, quibus columnae pavimenta podia extergantur, scalae, quae ad lacunaria admoveantur, instrumenti sunt, quia mundiorem domum reddunt. 23Papinianus quoque libro septimo responsorum ait: sigilla et statuae adfixae instrumento domus non continentur, sed domus portio sunt: quae vero non sunt adfixa, instrumento non continentur, inquit: suppellectili enim adnumerantur, excepto horologio aereo, quod non est adfixum: nam et hoc instrumento domus putat contineri, sicut prothyrum domus, si velamen est, inquit, instrumento domus continetur. 24Fistulae autem et canales et crateres et si qua sunt alia ad aquas salientes necessaria, item serae et claves magis domus portio quam domus instrumentum sunt. 25Specularia quoque adfixa magis puto domus esse partem: nam et in emptione domus et specularia et pegmata cedere, sive in aedificio sunt posita sive ad tempus detracta. sed si non sint, reposita ad hoc tamen sint, ut suppleantur, si qua desint: instrumento potius continebuntur. 26Cancellos quoque instrumento contineri puto. 27Sed si fundus non sit cum instrumento legatus, sed ita ut instructus sit, quaesitum est, an plus contineatur, quam si cum instrumento legatus esset. et Sabinus libris ad Vitellium scribit fatendum esse plus esse, cum instructus fundus legetur, quam si cum instrumento: quam sententiam cottidie increscere et invalescere videmus. quanto igitur hoc legatum uberius est, videndum est. et Sabinus definit et Cassius apud Vitellium notat: omnia quae eo collocata sunt, ut instructior esset pater familias, instructo, inquit, continebuntur, id est quae ibi habuit, ut instructior esset. hoc ergo legato non agri instrumentum, sed proprium suum instrumentum reliquisse videtur. 28Proinde si fundus sit instructus legatus, et suppellex continebitur, quae illic fuit usus ipsius gratia, et vestis non solum stragula, sed et qua ibi uti solebat: mensae quoque eboreae vel si quae aliae, item vitrea et aurum et argentum: vina quoque, si qua ibi fuerint usus ipsius causa, continentur, et si quid aliud utensilium. 29Sed si qua eo congesserat non usus ipsius causa, sed custodiae gratia, non continebuntur: vina etiam, quae in apothecis sunt, non cedent: et hoc iure utimur, ut quae ibi pater familias quasi in horreo habuit, haec non contineantur. 30Celsus quoque libro nono decimo digestorum scribit fructus ibi repositos, ut venirent vel in alium usum quam fundi converterentur, instructo fundo non contineri. 31Idem Celsus eodem libro ait etiam suppellecticarios et ceteros hoc genus servos contineri, id est ministeria, quibus instructus erat in eo fundo (extra ea quae libertatem acceperunt), et qui rure morari solebant. 32Si instructum fundum legasset, ea paedagogia, quae ibi habebat, ut, cum ibi venisset, praesto essent in triclinio, legato continentur. 33Contubernales quoque servorum, id est uxores, et natos, instructo fundo contineri verum est. 34Instructo autem fundo et bibliothecam et libros, qui illic erant, ut quotiens venisset uteretur, contineri constat. sed si quasi apotheca librorum utebatur, contra erit dicendum. 35Neratius quoque libro quarto epistularum Rufino respondit instructo fundo et suppellectilem et vina et mancipia non solum ad cultum custodiamve villae, sed etiam quae ut ipsi patri familias in ministerio ibi essent, legato cedere. 36Imagines quoque hae solae legatae videntur, quae in aliquo ornatu villae fuerunt. 37Papinianus quoque praediis instructis legatis mancipia non contineri, quae temporis causa illic fuerunt ac non eo animo transtulit pater familias, ut aut fundi aut suum instrumentum faceret. 38Idem respondit praediis instructis legatis actorem ex his in provinciam missum, ut ordinatis negotiis ad pristinum actum rediret, legato praediorum cedere, quamvis nondum redierit. 39Idem respondit instructis hortis legatis etiam vina, quae ibi fuerunt, quo dominus esset instructior, contineri: aliud esse, si horrea ibi habuit, unde instruebatur vel in urbe vel in aliis praediis. 40Idem respondit domo per fideicommissum relicta cum supellectili Claudio Hieronymiano clarissimo viro ab Umbrio Primo et mensas et ceteram suppellectilem, quam in hortis pater familias in proconsulatum profecturus contulerat, ut tutiore loco essent, contineri. 41Idem respondit theriacam quoque et cetera medicamenta, quae secessus causa dominus ibi habuit, et vestem propter secessum ibi depositam instructo fundo legato inesse. 42Idem respondit domo ita, ut instructa est, cum omni iure suo legata urbanam familiam, item artifices, quorum operae ceteris quoque praediis exhibebantur, legato non contineri: ostiarii autem, inquit, vel topiarii diaetarii aquarii domui tantum deservientes continebuntur. sed quod de artificibus ait, falsum est, si eius domus causa parati sunt, licet aliis quoque praediis commodabantur. 43Idem respondit domo instructa legata mensas eboreas et libros non contineri: sed et hoc falsum est: nam omne, quidquid in domo fuit, quo instructior ibi esset pater familias, continebitur, suppellectilem autem patris familiae instrumentum esse nemo dubitat. denique Neratius libro quarto epistularum Marcello fratri suo respondit et vestem domus instructae legato contineri: maxime, inquit, in proposita specie: proponebatur enim, qui legaverat, argentum et rationes excepisse: nam qui haec, inquit, excepit, non potest non videri de ceteris rebus, quae in ea essent, sensisse. sed et ipse Papinianus eodem libro responsorum ait patrem mercatorem ac faeneratorem, qui duos filios totidemque filias heredes instituerat, ita legasse: ‘filiis maribus domum meam instructam do lego darique iubeo’, merces et pignora an contineantur, quaeri posse: sed facilem iudici voluntatis coniecturam fore ceteris patris facultatibus examinatis. 44Celsus scribit servis qui in fundo morarentur legatis, vicarios eorum non contineri, nisi appareat et de vicariis eum sensisse. 45Papinianus quoque libro septimo responsorum uxori, cui vir omnia, quae in domo erant, ab herede filia praestari voluit, cautiones debitorum emptionesque servorum non videri legatas respondit, nisi, inquit, ex alia parte et de servis eum cogitasse apparuerit, scilicet ut eorum servorum ei legasse videatur emptiones, quos et ipsos voluit ad eam pertinere. 46Si quis fundum ita ut instructus est legaverit et adiecerit cum supellectili vel mancipiis vel una aliqua re, quae nominatim expressa non erat, utrum minuit legatum adiciendo speciem an vero non, quaeritur. et Papinianus respondit non videri minutum, sed potius ex abundanti adiectum. 47Idem Papinianus libro septimo responsorum ait: instructis hortis filio legatis mater argentum muliebre filiae legaverat: respondit etiam id argentum muliebre, quod in hortis habuit, ut ibi esset instructior, ad filiam pertinere.
12 Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XX. The question arose whether grain which was intended for the support of slaves who cultivated the land would form part of the equipment of the latter. The greater number of authorities do not think that it would, because it is to be consumed; as the equipment in general includes everything which is intended to remain on the land for a considerable time, and without which the possession of it cannot be maintained. Food prepared for the support of the slaves is considered as accessory, rather than as something destined to promote cultivation. I think, however, that grain and wine intended for food should be included in the equipment, and the pupils of Servius state that this was also his opinion. Likewise, it is held by some authorities that grain reserved for seed is included in the equipment, and I believe this to be correct, because it has reference to the cultivation of the soil, and is consumed in such a way that it is always replaced. Grain reserved for seed differs in no respect from that intended for the food of slaves. 1We have mentioned granaries, for the reason that the crops are kept therein, and earthen vessels, and bins in which they are arranged, as belonging to the class of things used for the preservation of crops. Whatever is intended for the transportation of the crops is also included in the equipment of the land, for example, beasts of burden, vehicles, ships, barrels, and sacks. 2Alfenus, however, says that if the testator should make a bequest of certain slaves who were not attached to the land, those who were attached to it will not be included in the equipment of the same, because he is of the opinion that no animal is an implement. This is not correct, for it is well established that the slaves who are on the land for the purpose of cultivating it are included in its equipment. 3The question arose whether a slave who was a tenant on land is included in a devise as an implement. Labeo and Pegasus very properly hold that he is not, because he is not on the premises as an appurtenance to the same, even if he were accustomed to exercise supervision over others employed thereon. 4Labeo thinks that a forester who has been appointed to see to the preservation of the crops is included in the legacy, but that one who is charged with the maintenance of boundaries is not. Neratius, however, holds that he is. The latter opinion, at present, prevails, so that all foresters are included. 5Trebatius goes still farther, and thinks that the baker and the barber who are employed for the benefit of the slaves of rustic estates are included, as well as the mason whose duty it is to repair the buildings, and the female slaves who bake the bread, and take care of the house, and likewise the millers employed on the estate and the cook and stewardess, provided they assist any male slave by their service; and also women who are spinners and weavers, and make clothing for the slaves and prepare their food. 6The question, however, arises whether any accessories to the equipment are included in a legacy of the latter; for slaves employed for the benefit of the farmers, such as spinners, weavers, barbers, fullers, and cooks do not, properly speaking, form part of the equipment of the land, but are they accessory to the same? I think that cooks are included as well as spinners and weavers, together with the others above enumerated, and the pupils of Servius assert that this was also his opinion. 7It must be held that the testator intended that the wives and children of those above mentioned, and who were members of the same household, should be included in the legacy; for it is incredible that he would have directed such a cruel separation to take place. 8Where flocks are pastured for a part of the year upon the land, and food is purchased for them during the remainder; or where the land is cultivated for a portion of the year by the slaves, and they are hired out for pay during the remaining portion, they will, nevertheless, be included in the equipment. 9It is well established that the steward also (that is to say the slave who is charged with seeing that the accounts are properly rendered), as well as the porter and the muleteer, are also included in the equipment. 10The millstones, machinery, hay, straw, the ass used to turn the wheel and all the apparatus of the mill are included; the brazen cauldron in which the juice of the grape is boiled and spiced, and those which contain water intended for drinking and washing by the slaves are also part of the equipment, as well as the hand-barrows and carts used for the transportation of manure. 11Cassius says that anything attached to the soil does not constitute any part of the equipment of the land, as reeds and osiers before they are cut, because the land cannot be an equipment of itself. If, however, they should be cut, I think that they will be included, because they serve for the production of crops. The same rule applies to stakes. 12If there is game on the land, I think that the slaves who are hunters and trackers, as well as the dogs, and everything else necessary for hunting, are included in the equipment, especially if the land derives an income from this source. 13Likewise, if an income is derived from bird-catching, the slaves who are fowlers and their nets, and any other apparatus used for this purpose, are included in the equipment. This is not extraordinary, as Sabinus and Cassius think that birds themselves are included in the equipment of the land, for instance, such as have been domesticated. 14Where a man uses the same implements on different tracts of land, the question arises, to which one will they belong as equipment? I think that if the intention of the testator is plain as to which tract of land he intended them to belong, they will be accessory thereto, for the other tracts have, as it were, borrowed the said implements from this one. If his intention is not clear, they will be accessory to none of them, for we cannot divide implements proportionally. 15Any furniture, or other articles found on the land, which the owner intended to be placed in better order, will not be included in the equipment of the same. 16It should be considered what comes under the head of household equipment, where the latter is bequeathed. Pegasus says that the equipment of a house includes everything used for protection against the weather, or for the prevention of fire; but not what is employed for purposes of pleasure; and therefore neither the glass screens nor awnings which are kept in the house to provide against cold or to furnish shade are due. This was the opinion of Cassius, who was accustomed to say that a great difference existed between utensils and ornaments, as utensils are articles which are employed for the protection of the house, and ornaments are things which contribute to the pleasure of the owner, as for instance, paintings. 17Cassius thinks that the hair-cloth curtains used to prevent buildings from being affected by wind or rain belong to the equipment of a house. 18Pegasus and many other authorities say that vinegar kept for the purpose of extinguishing fire, mops made of rags, siphons, poles, ladders, mats, sponges, buckets and brooms are included. 19If the owner should have obtained any tiles or beams for his house, they will be included in the equipment of the same, if they were intended for this use, and were not employed in any other. Hence, if he had a scaffold required for this purpose, it would also be included in the equipment of the building. 20Celsus says with reference to curtains extending over the thresholds and window sills, and also concerning such as are suspended from columns, that they should rather be classed as furniture; and Sabinus and Cassius are of the same opinion. 21Pipes and grappling hooks are also included in the term equipment. 22Likewise, long rods used for removing spider webs, sponges with which columns, floors, and the feet of furniture are cleansed, and ladders employed for the purpose of washing ceilings, are utensils, because they render the house cleaner. 23Papinianus says, in the Seventh Book of Opinions, that ornamental plaster work, and statues fastened to the walls, are not included in the equipment of a house, but are part of the house itself; and, indeed, where they are not attached to it, they are not included, for they come under the head of furniture; with the exception of brass clocks which are not fastened to the walls; for he thinks that these, like the cloth curtains suspended before a house, form part of its equipment. 24Pipes, gutters and basins, as well as other things required for fountains, together with locks and keys, rather constitute a part of the house itself than accessories thereof. 25Panes of glass, attached to a house, I incline to believe belong to it, for when a house is bought, the panes and the shelves are included in the purchase; whether they are in the building at the time, or have been temporarily removed. If, however, they have not been replaced, but are, nevertheless, kept to be restored to their original position, they will be embraced in the equipment. 26I think that lattices should be included under the head of equipment. 27Where a tract of land is not devised with its equipment, but in order that it may be furnished with it, the question arose whether more is included than if the land had been merely left together with its equipment. Sabinus stated in his works on Vitellius, that it must be confessed that more is left where land is devised to be provided with the means of cultivation than where it is devised furnished with them, which opinion we see is increasing in importance and validity every day. Therefore let us consider in what respect this legacy is more advantageous than the other. Sabinus lays down the rule, and Cassius, in a note on Vitellius, says that everything that has been brought upon the land in order that the owner of the same may be better prepared for cultivating it is included; that is to say, whatever he has there in order that he may be more abundantly supplied. Thus, by such a legacy he is held to have left not the implements which belong to the land, but those that constitute his own private property. 28Hence, if land already provided with the necessary implements is devised, and the furniture which was there for the use of the testator himself is included, together with clothing, not only outer garments, but also those which the testator was accustomed to wear while there, and tables of ivory or of any other material, vessels of glass, gold, and silver, as well as wines, if there were any intended for his own use, and any other utensils; they will also be included. 29Where, however, the testator had collected certain articles, not for his own use but for safe-keeping, they will not be included. Wines contained in warehouses are also not included. We have adopted this rule so that whatever the head of the household has collected there, as, for instance, in a granary, may not be embraced in the legacy. 30Celsus also states, in the Nineteenth Book of the Digest, that where fruits are collected on the premises in order to be sold, or for any other purpose than for the use or benefit of the land itself, they will not be included among the equipment of the same. 31Celsus also says, in the same Book, that slaves who have care of the furniture and other slaves of this kind are included; that is to say, household slaves, who are employed on the land, with the exception of those who have received their freedom, and who are accustomed to reside in the country. 32If a testator should devise land already provided with the means of cultivation, young slaves who are being instructed in the service of the table, and whom the testator was accustomed to have there, whenever he came, are embraced in the legacy. 33The members of the slaves’ families, that is, their wives and children, are undoubtedly included in the devise of land with its equipment. 34Where land with its equipment is devised, it is well established that the library, and any books upon the premises, which the head of the household made use of whenever he came, are included. If, however, a warehouse should be used for the storage of the books, the contrary opinion must be held. 35Neratius, also, in replying to Rufinus, stated, in the Fourth Book of the Epistles, that the devise of a tract of land with its equipment includes the furniture, the wines, and the slaves, not only those employed in the cultivation of the soil, and the care of the same, but also those attached to the personal service of the head of the household. 36Only such pictures are considered to have been bequeathed as were used for the adornment of the country-house. 37Papinianus holds that where land is devised with its equipment those slaves are not included who were there only temporarily, and who had not been brought by the testator either for the purpose of being employed on the land, or for his own service. 38The same authority was of the opinion that where land was devised with its equipment, and the steward who had charge of the same was sent back into the province to resume his former duties, after having transacted the business for which he came, he will be included in the devise of the land, even though he may not yet have returned. 39He also says, where a testator devised his gardens with their equipment, that even the wines which were there for the purpose of having the table of the owner better supplied, are included. It is otherwise, however, if he kept the wines in warehouses, from whence he transported them either to the city, or to other estates. 40He also holds that where a house was devised by Umbrius Primus, under a trust, together with its furniture, to Claudius Hieronianus, a most illustrious man, that the tables and the other furniture which the head of the household, being about to start on a journey to assume the proconsulate of a province, had stored in warehouses in order that they might be in a safer place, were included. 41He also gave it as his opinion that a certain antidote against poison, and other drugs, together with any clothing which he had deposited there on account of his departure, were included in the devise of the land with its equipment. 42He also held, where a house was devised with its equipment and all the legal rights attaching thereto, that the city slaves, as well as those who were skilled workmen, and whose services were also employed on other tracts of land, were not included in the bequest; but he he says that the doorkeeper, the gardeners, those having charge of the rooms, the water-carriers, and slaves who only worked in the house will be included. However, what he states with reference to the skilled workmen is not true, if they were destined for the service of the house, even though they were lent to other estates to be employed thereon. 43He also gives it as his opinion that where a house is devised with its equipment, ivory tables and books are not included. This, however, is false, for everything in the house by means of which the owner may be better provided and rendered more comfortable will be included. No one doubts that the furniture is something which contributes to the convenience of the head of a household. Finally, Neratius, in the Fourth Book of Epistles, informs his brother Marcellus that clothing is included in the devise of a house with its equipment; and he says that this is especially true in the case stated, for it was alleged that the testator who devised the property excepted the silver plate and the accounts, for anyone who excepted these things cannot have had in his mind any other articles which were there. Papinianus himself, however, says in the same Book of Opinions, that where a father who was a merchant and a money-broker, and had two sons and as many daughters, appointed them his heirs as follows, “I do give and bequeath to my sons my house, furnished as it is, and I order it to be delivered to them,” the question may be asked whether the merchandise and pledges are contained in this bequest. It would be easy for the judge to ascertain the intention of the testator by examining his other property. 44Celsus says that where anyone bequeaths the slaves residing on the land, their under-slaves are not included, unless it should be evident that the testator had them also in his mind. 45Papinianus also held, in the Seventh Book of Opinions, that a wife, to whom her husband had left everything that was in his house, could not require his daughter, who was his heir, to surrender the obligations of debtors and the bills of sale of slaves that did not appear to have been bequeathed, unless (he says), it is clear that the testator had had the slaves in his mind, so that he would seem to have bequeathed to his wife the evidences of the transfer of said slaves whom themselves, he intended should belong to her. 46If anyone should devise a tract of land “With its equipment, just as it is,” and should afterwards add, “Together with its furniture, and its slaves, and everything else which was not expressly mentioned,” the question arises whether, by adding this clause, he will diminish the bequest, or not. Papinianus answers that it will not be considered to have been diminished, but rather to have been unnecessarily increased by this superfluous addition. 47Papinianus likewise, in the Seventh Book of Opinions, says, if certain gardens with all their equipment are devised by a mother to a son, and she also bequeaths to her daughter her silverware intended for the use of women, that his opinion is if the said silverware, which she kept in her gardens, was there for her own personal convenience, it will belong to her daughter.
13 Paulus libro quarto ad Sabinum. Tabernae cauponiae instrumento legato etiam institores contineri Neratius existimat: sed videndum, ne inter instrumentum tabernae cauponiae et instrumentum cauponae sit discrimen, ut tabernae non nisi loci instrumenta sint, ut dolia vasa ancones calices trullae, quae circa cenam solent traici, item urnae aereae et congiaria sextaria et similia: cauponae autem, cum negotiationis nomen sit, etiam institores. 1Instrumento balneario legato etiam balneatorem contineri Neratius respondit:
13 Paulus, On Sabinus, Book IV. Neratius thinks that where a tavern with its equipment is devised, even the slaves who conduct it are included. It must, however, be considered whether a difference does not exist between the utensils of a house used for drinking purposes, and those of a warehouse for the storage of wine, as only the following are utensils of the latter, namely, casks, vats, large jars, cauldrons, pitchers for pouring out wine, and which are ordinarily passed at supper; brazen urns, large and small measures for liquids, and other things of this kind; but in the word “tavern,” as it is a commercial term, slaves who transact the business are also included. 1Neratius gives it as his opinion that where a bath is devised as equipped, it also includes the slave in charge of the same.
14 Idem libro secundo ad Vitellium. continetur autem et fornicator.
14 The Same, On Vitellius, Book II. The slave employed in the vaults to keep up the fire is also included.
15 Pomponius libro sexto ad Sabinum. Si ita testamento scriptum sit: ‘quae tabernarum exercendarum instruendarum pistrini cauponae causa facta parataque sunt, do lego’, his verbis Servius respondit et caballos, qui in pistrinis essent, et pistores, et in cauponio institores et focariam, mercesque, quae in his tabernis essent, legatas videri. 1Domo instructa responsum [ed. maior est] <ed. minor et> suppellectilem legatam, non etiam vina, quia domus vinis instructa intellegi non potest. 2Mulier villae custos perpetua fundo qui cum instrumento legatus esset aut instructo continebitur, sicuti saltuarius: par enim ratio est: nam desiderant tam villae quam agri custodiam, illic, ne quid vicini aut agri aut fructuum occupent, hic, ne quid ceterarum rerum quae in villa continentur: villa autem sine ulla dubitatione pars fundi habetur.
15 Pomponius, On Sabinus, Book VI. Where the following clause was inserted into a will, “I do give and bequeath all the utensils which are intended for the purpose of carrying on the business of my shops, and for furnishing the same, and for that of my mill and warehouse,” Servius held that the horses which were in the mills, and the slaves who were millers, as well as those employed in the shops, the woman who cooked, and the merchandise contained in the shop, were all considered to have been bequeathed. 1Where a house, fully equipped, is devised it was decided that the furniture is included, but not the wine; because where a house is devised ready furnished, wines cannot be understood to be there for that purpose. 2A female slave who was left constantly in charge of a country-house, and bequeathed as belonging to the same, is included in the devise just as a forester is, and for the same reason; since houses require guardians as well as land, on the one hand, to prevent the neighbors from trespassing, or appropriating the fruit, and on the other, to prevent anyone from removing any of the property contained in the house. The building, however, is undoubtedly considered a part of the land.
16 Alfenus libro secundo digestorum a Paulo epitomatorum. Villae instrumento legato supellectilem non contineri verius est. 1Vinea et instrumento eius legato instrumentum vineae nihil esse Servius respondit: qui eum consulebat, Cornelium respondisse aiebat palos perticas rastros ligones instrumenti vineae esse: quod verius est. 2Quidam uxori fundum, uti instructus esset, in quo ipse habitabat, legavit. consultus de mulieribus lanificis an instrumento continerentur, respondit non quidem esse instrumenti fundi, sed quoniam ipse pater familias, qui legasset, in eo fundo habitasset, dubitari non oportere, quin et ancillae et ceterae res, quibus pater familias in eo fundo esset instructus, omnes legatae viderentur.
16 Alfenus, Epitomes of the Digest by Paulus, Book II. Where the utensils of a country-house are bequeathed, the better opinion is that the furniture is not included. 1Servius gave it as his opinion, where a vineyard and everything appertaining to it was left, that there were no such things as implements used for the cultivation of a vineyard. Cornelius, when his opinion was asked upon this point, replied that stakes, poles, and hoes are implements which belong to a vineyard; which is correct. 2A certain man left to his wife a tract of land where he himself resided, equipped for cultivation just as it was. When advice was taken whether the female slaves, who were spinners and weavers, were included in the devise, the answer was that they did not, properly speaking, constitute part of the equipment of the land; but, as the testator who devised the property lived upon it, there could be no doubt that the female slaves and other property which were on the premises for the use of the head of the household should be held to be embraced in the bequest.
17 Marcianus libro septimo institutionum. Item pictoris instrumento legato cerae colores similiaque horum legato cedunt, item peniculi et cauteria et conchae. 1Instrumento piscatorio contineri Aristo ait naucellas, quae piscium capiendorum causa comparatae sunt: sed et piscatores contineri verius est. 2Instrumento balneatorio legato dictum est balneatorem sic instrumento contineri balneario, quomodo instrumento fundi saltuarium et topiarios, et instrumento cauponio institorem, cum balneae sine balneatoribus usum suum praebere non possint.
17 Marcianus, Institutes, Book VII. When the studio of a painter is bequeathed with its equipment, the wax, the colors, and everything of this kind is included in the legacy, as well as the brushes, the implements for finishing encaustic tiles, and the flasks for oil. 1When the equipment of a fisherman is bequeathed, Aristo says that it includes the boats used for catching fish. The better opinion is that it also includes the fishermen themselves. 2Where the utensils of a bath are bequeathed, it has been established that the slave in charge of the bath is included; just as where a wood is devised, the forester, and where a wineshop is devised, the slave in charge of the same, are included; for baths cannot be used without the bathers.
18 Paulus libro secundo ad Vitellium. Cum de lanionis instrumento quaeritur, semota carne mensas pondera ferramentaque laniandae carnis causa praeparata, item trutinas cultros dolabras instrumento relinquimus. 1Instrumento legato aliquando etiam personas legantium necesse est inspici. ut ecce pistorio instrumento legato ita ipsi pistores inesse videri possunt, si pater familias pistrinum exercuit: nam plurimum interest, instrumentum pistoribus an pistrino paratum sit. 2Asinam molendariam et molam negat Neratius instrumento fundi contineri. 3Item caccabos et patinas in instrumento fundi esse dicimus, quia sine his pulmentarium coqui non potest. nec multum refert inter caccabos et aenum, quod supra focum pendet: hic aqua ad potandum calefit, in illis pulmentarium coquitur. quod si aenum instrumento continetur, urcei quoque, quibus aqua in aenum infunditur, in idem genus rediguntur, ac deinceps in infinitum primis quibusque proxima copulata procedunt. optimum ergo esse Pedius ait non propriam verborum significationem scrutari, sed in primis quid testator demonstrare voluerit, deinde in qua praesumptione sunt qui in quaque regione commorantur. 4Cum de vilico quaereretur et an instrumento inesset et dubitaretur, Scaevola consultus respondit, si non pensionis certa quantitate, sed fide dominica coleretur, deberi. 5Idem consultus de meta molendaria respondit, si rusticis eius fundi operariis moleretur, eam quoque deberi. est autem meta inferior pars molae, catillus superior. 6De bubulco quoque ita respondit, sive de eo, qui bubus ibi araret, sive de eo, qui boves eius fundi aratores pasceret, quaereretur, deberi. 7De putatoribus quoque ita respondit, si eius fundi causa haberentur, inesse: 8Pastores quoque et fossores ad legatarium pertinere. 9Item cum fundus ita legatus esset: ‘Maevio fundum Seianum, ita ut optimus maximusque est, cum omni instrumento rustico et urbano et mancipiis quae ibi sunt’ et quaereretur, an semina deberentur, respondit verius esse deberi, nisi aliud testatorem sensisse heres probaret. idem respondit de frumento reposito ad mancipiorum exhibitionem. 10In instrumento medici esse collyria et emplastra et cetera eius generis Cassius scribit. 11Cui fundum instructum legaverat, nominatim mancipia legavit: quaesitum est, an reliqua mancipia, quae non nominasset, instrumento cederent. Cassius ait responsum esse, tametsi mancipia instructi fundi sint, tamen videri eos solos legatos esse, qui nominati essent, quod appareret non intellexisse patrem familias instrumento quoque servos adnumeratos esse. 12Sabinus. cui fundus quaeque ibi sint legata sunt, ei fundus et omnia, quae in eo solita sunt esse quaeque ibi maiore parte anni morari et hi, qui in eum manendi causa recipere se consueverunt, legati videntur: at si qua consulto in fundo congesta contractave sunt, quo legatum cumularetur, ea non videntur legata esse. 13Quidam cum ita legasset: ‘villam meam ita ut ipse possedi cum suppellectile mensis mancipiis, quae ibi deputabuntur, urbanis et rusticis, vinis, quae in diem mortis meae ibi erunt, et decem aureis’, et quaereretur, cum in diem mortis ibi libros et vitreamina et vesticulam habuerit, an eadem omnia legato cederent, quoniam quaedam enumerasset: Scaevola respondit specialiter expressa, quae legato cederent. 14Domum instructam legavit cum omnibus adfixis: quaeritur de instrumentis debitorum, an ea legatarius habere potest. respondit secundum ea quae proponerentur non posse.
18 Paulus, On Vitellius, Book II. Whenever, in the case of the bequest of the implements of a butcher, any question arises, after excluding the meat, we leave the tables, the weights, the cleavers, the balances, the knives, and the axes as the equipment. 1Where the equipment of anything is bequeathed, it is sometimes necessary to take into consideration the persons of those who leave the legacy; as, for instance, where the equipment of a mill is bequeathed, since the slaves who are the millers will only be included when the head of the household conducted the business of the mill himself; for it makes a great deal of difference whether the utensils were intended for the use of the millers, or for that of the mill. 2Neratius says that the ass which turns the wheel of the mill and the millstone are not included in the equipment which goes with the transfer of the land. 3Likewise, we say that pots and pans are included in the equipment of a tract of land, because, without them, cooking cannot be done, nor is there much difference between the pots and the cauldrons which are suspended over the fire; as in the latter drinking water is heated, and in the former food is boiled. If, however, the cauldrons are included in the equipment, the pitchers also, with which water is poured into the cauldrons, come under the same head; and thus one vessel follows another in regular succession. Therefore, Pedius says that it is best not to adhere too closely to the literal meaning of words, but above all things to find out what the testator intended to designate, and then ascertain the opinion of those residing in different districts of the province. 4Where a question arises with reference to a farmer who is a slave, as to whether he is included as part of the equipment of the land, and there is any doubt on the subject; Scævola, having been consulted, held that the slave should be included, where he was the confidential agent of his master, and did not cultivate the land for a certain amount of the income from the same. 5The same authority, having been interrogated with reference to the lower millstone of a mill, answered that it also was included, if it was operated for the benefit of the slaves employed in the labors of the farm. The lower part of a millstone is called meta, and the upper part catillus. 6Where inquiry was made with reference to a plowman, the answer was that, no matter whether one who actually tilled the land, or one who fed the oxen used in cultivating it, was meant, he was included in the legacy. 7He also answered that trimmers of trees were included, if they were specially considered to be attached to the land. 8Shepherds and excavators also belong to the legatee. 9Likewise, where a tract of land is devised as follows, “I give to Mævius the Seian Estate in the very best condition in which it may be found, together with all the implements, rustic and urban, and the slaves who are there,” the question was asked whether grain for seed would be included. The reply was that it certainly would be, unless the heir could prove that the intention of the testator was otherwise. The same authority rendered a similar opinion with reference to grain reserved for the maintenance of slaves. 10Cassius says that in the equipment of a slave-physician eyewashes, plasters, and other things of this kind are included. 11A testator left certain of his slaves, whom he mentioned by name, to a person to whom he had devised a tract of land with its equipment. The question arose whether his remaining slaves, whom he did not enumerate, were included in the equipment. Cassius says it was decided that, although the slaves constituted part of the equipment of the land, only those who were designated by name were considered to have been bequeathed, as it is evident that the head of the household did not intend that the others should also be classed as such. 12Sabinus says that where a tract of land with everything thereon is devised, the soil itself, and whatever is ordinarily kept there, and remains for the greater part of the year, as well as those slaves who are accustomed to betake themselves thither for the purpose of residing on the land, are held to have been left, but anything which has been designedly conveyed there for the purpose of increasing the amount of the legacy will not be considered to have been bequeathed. 13Where a testator made a bequest as follows, “I leave my country-house in the same condition as I myself possessed it, together with the furniture, tables, and the urban and rustic slaves which shall be sent there, and the wines that may be in said house at the time of my death, and ten aurei in addition,” as upon the day of the testator’s death he had books, articles of glass, and a small clothes-press in the house, the question arose whether these articles should be included among those enumerated in the bequest. Scævola answered that only such articles as were specifically mentioned formed part of it. 14A testator left his house furnished, together with everything attached to the same. The question arose whether the legatee was entitled to the obligations of debtors. The answer was that, in accordance with the facts stated, he was not entitled to them.
19 Paulus libro tertio decimo responsorum. Si mancipia quae, post testamentum factum in fundum Seiae relictum a testatore inducta, fundi colendi gratia in eodem fundo fuerint, ea quoque instrumento fundi contineri respondi: quamvis enim ea mancipia testator demonstrasset, quae tunc ibi essent cum legaret, tamen non minuendi legati, sed augendi causa mancipiorum quoque fecit mentionem. ceterum instrumento fundi mancipia quoque colendi agri causa inducta contineri non ambigitur. 1Paulus respondit villae instrumento neque fructus repositos neque equitium contineri, suppellectile autem legato cedere: servum vero arte fabrica peritum, qui annuam mercedem praestabat, instrumento villae non contineri.
19 Paulus, Opinions, Book XIII. I gave it as my opinion that if, after the execution of the will, any slaves were placed by the testator upon the land devised to Seia, for the purpose of cultivating the same, they belonged to the said land and were also included in its equipment; even though the testator enumerated the slaves who were there at the time that he made the devise, as he mentioned them not for the purpose of diminishing the legacy, but in order to increase it. Moreover, there is no doubt that slaves who have been brought on land for the purpose of cultivating it are included in its equipment. 1Paulus held that neither crops which are stored, nor a stud of horses, are included in the devise of a country-house with its equipment, but that the furniture forms part of it. A slave skilled in the art of building, who pays his master a certain sum of money every year, is not included in the equipment of the house.
20 Scaevola libro tertio responsorum. Seiae ex parte heredi institutae, si heres erit, fundos per praeceptionem dederat instructos cum suis vilicis et reliquis colonorum et codicillis ita scripsit: ‘postea mihi venit in mentem: Seiae fundos quos reliqui, ita ut sunt instructi rustico instrumento suppellectile pecore et vilicis cum reliquis colonorum et apotheca habere volo’. quaesitum est, an etiam ea, quae patris familias usus cottidiani causa in fundis fuerunt, legato continerentur. respondit testamento quidem ut proponeretur Seiae, insuper fundum, legatum, verum non amplius deberi, quam in codicillis (quos sane post oblivionem testamentariae scripturae fecisset) instructi appellatione contineri velle se manifeste ostendisset. 1Liberto suo quidam praedia legavit his verbis: ‘Seio liberto meo fundos illum et illum do lego ita ut instructi sunt cum dotibus et reliquis colonorum et saltuariis cum contubernalibus suis et filiis et filiabus’. quaesitum est, an Stichus servus, qui praedium unum ex his coluit et reliquatus est amplam summam, ex causa fideicommissi Seio debeatur. respondit, si non fide dominica, sed mercede, ut extranei coloni solent, fundum coluisset, non deberi. 2‘Gaio Seio alumno meo fundos meos illum et illum, ita ut instructi sunt, et domum superiorem dari volo’: quaesitum est, an etiam domum instructam dari voluerit. respondit secundum ea quae proponerentur ita videri dedisse, nisi is, a quo peteretur, aliud testatorem sensisse manifeste doceret: at si habitationis, id est aedificii instrumentum legasset, non cedere servos operae aliive rei paratos. 3Praedia ut instructa sunt cum dotibus et reliquis colonorum et vilicorum et mancipiis et pecore omni legavit et peculiis et cum actore: quaesitum est, an reliqua colonorum, qui finita conductione interposita cautione de colonia discesserant, ex verbis supra scriptis legato cedant. respondit non videri de his reliquis esse cogitatum. 4Idem quaesiit in actore legato, an uxor et filia legato cedant, cum actor non in praediis, sed in civitate moratus sit. respondit nihil proponi, cur cedant. 5Idem quaesiit, cum testator facto testamento in provinciam sit profectus, an ea mancipia, quae post profectionem eius aut mortem sine cuiusquam auctoritate sponte sua ad parentes et notos sibi homines in fundos legatos transiere, legato cedant. respondit non legatos eos, qui forte veluti commeantes transissent. 6‘Pamphilae libertae meae dari volo fundum Titianum cum instrumento et his quae in eodem erunt cum moriar’. quaesitum est, si Stichus servus, ex eo fundo ante annum mortis testatoris abductus et in disciplinam traditus, postea in eum fundum non reversus sit, an debeatur. respondit, si studendi causa misisset, non quo a fundo eum aliorsum transferat, deberi. 7‘Tyrannae sorori meae fundum meum Graecianum cum stabulo et instrumento rustico omni relinquo’. quaeritur, an fundi appellatione etiam pascua, quae ad eum simul cum fundo pervenerint et quae semper in usibus huius possessionis habuerat, legato cederent. respondit, si prata fundo Graeciano ita coniunxisset, uti sub una fundi appellatione haberentur, ea quoque deberi. 8Instructis domibus legatis crabattus argento inaurato tectus mortis Titiae tempore in domibus non est repertus, sed in horreis tantisper conditus: quaero, an is quoque praestandus sit. respondit, si in domo esse soleret et quo tutiore loco haberetur, interim in horreo allatus esset, nihilo minus praestandum. 9Quod adiecit testator ‘uti possedi’ an hoc significet ‘sicut instructa in diem mortis habuit’, id est cum mancipiis pecoribus instrumento rustico? respondit: non de iure quaeritur.
20 Scævola, Opinions, Book III. A testator left Seia, whom he had appointed heir to a portion of his estate, certain lands as a preferred legacy, together with the farmers who cultivated them, and any rent not yet paid by tenants, if she should become his heir; and then he made the following provision in a codicil: “It has afterwards occurred to me to mention that I wish Seia, to whom I devised my land, to also have all the farming implements, furniture, cattle, farmers, rent due from tenants, and supplies.” The question arose whether those articles which were on the land and were intended for the daily use of the head of the household, were included in the legacy. The answer was that, in accordance with the facts stated, property over and above the land had been bequeathed to Seia; but that no more was due to her than the testator had specifically mentioned in the codicil which he had drawn up after having forgotten to clearly indicate this in his will, and which he showed he intended to be included in the term equipment. 1A testator devised to his freedman certain lands as follows: “I do give and bequeath to my freedman, Seius, such-and-such and such-and-such tracts of land, provided with implements as they are, together with all dowries, and balances due from tenants, and also with the foresters, and their wives and their children.” The question arose whether the slave, Stichus, who cultivated one of the said tracts of land and owed a considerable sum of money, was due to Seius under the terms of the trust. The answer was if he cultivated the land, not as a trusted agent of his master, but for the payment of rent, as foreign tenants are accustomed to do, Seius would not be entitled to him. 2“I wish such-and-such tracts of land, provided with all implements, and the upper house, to be given to my foster-child Gaius Seius.” The question arose whether the testator designed that the house should be given, fully furnished. The answer was that, in accordance with the facts stated, he seemed to have intended it to be so given, unless the party of whom it was demanded could clearly show that his intention was otherwise. If, however, he had bequeathed the equipment of the lodging, that is to say, of the building, any slaves who were destined for other purposes and whose services were employed elsewhere would not be included in the legacy. 3A man left certain lands, provided as they were with implements, together with all property and balances due from tenants and farmers, with the slaves and cattle, and including the peculia and the steward. The question arose whether the balances due from tenants who, after their lease had expired and they had given security, had left their farms, would be included in the devise, under the words above mentioned. The answer was that the testator did not seem to have had these claims in his mind. 4With reference to the steward who was bequeathed, the question was also asked whether his wife and daughter were included in the legacy, as the steward did not reside on the land, but in the city. The answer was that there was nothing in the case stated to show that they were included. 5It was also asked, if a testator, after having made his will, should go on a journey into a province, whether those slaves who, after his departure, or after his death, had voluntarily and without the authority of anyone, betaken themselves to their relatives and acquaintances on the lands which had been devised, were included in the legacy. The answer was that those who were, so to speak, passing back and forth, were not bequeathed. 6“I desire that the Titian Estate, provided with its equipment along with everything else that is there, be given to Pamphila, my freedwoman, when I die.” The question arose whether the slave, Stichus, who a year before the death of the testator had been removed from the land to be educated, and afterwards did not return, would be included in the legacy. The answer was if the testator had sent him away merely for the purpose of instruction, and had not transferred him from the said tract of land to another, he would be included. 7“I leave to my sister, Tyranna, my Grecian estate, together with the barn, and all the farming implements.” The question arose whether the pastures, which the testator obtained at the same time with the said land, and which he had always kept for the use of the same, were included under the appellation, “Grecian estate,” and were embraced in the devise. The answer was that if he had united them with the Grecian estate, so that they were included under one denomination, they would form part of the devise. 8Where a house was left completely furnished, a silver-gilt bedstead, having temporarily been stored in a warehouse, was not found there at the time of the death of the testatrix, Titia. I ask if it also should be delivered to the legatee. The answer was that if it was ordinarily kept in the residence, and had, in the meantime, been taken to the warehouse in order to be in a safer place, it ought nevertheless, to be delivered to the legatee. 9Where the testator added the following phrase, “Just as I have possessed it,” does this refer to the way in which the land was equipped at the time of his death, that is to say, with slaves, cattle, and farming implements? The answer was that this has no reference to the legal rights of the legatee.
21 Pomponius libro primo fideicommissorum. Cum fundus sine instrumento legatus sit, dolia molae olivariae et praelum et quaecumque infixa inaedificataque sunt fundo legato continentur, nulla autem ex his rebus quae moveri possunt paucis exceptis fundi appellatione continentur. de molis tum quaeri solet, cum ita adfixae itave inaedificatae sint, ut partes aedificiorum esse videantur.
21 Pomponius, Trusts, Book I. Where a tract of land is devised without its equipment, the casks, olive-mills, presses, and everything else fastened to or built upon the land, are included in the devise; but none of these things which can be moved are, with very few exceptions, included under the designation real-property. Where any question arises concerning mills attached to the land, or erected upon it, they are considered as parts of the buildings.
22 Paulus libro tertio sententiarum. Fundo legato ‘ut optimus maximusque est’ retia apraria et cetera venationis instrumenta continebuntur: quod etiam ad instrumenta pertinet, si quaestus fundi ex maxima parte in venationibus consistat. 1Fundo legato cum mancipiis et pecoribus et omni instrumento rustico et urbano peculium actoris ante testatorem defuncti, si ex eodem fundo fuerit, magis placet ad legatarium pertinere.
22 Paulus, Opinions, Book III. Where land is devised, “In the very best condition in which it may be found,” the nets, and all other apparatus for hunting which refers to the equipment, are included in the devise, if the revenue of the land is principally derived from the chase. 1Where a tract of real property was devised, “Together with the slaves and cattle, and all its rustic and urban equipment, the peculium acquired by the steward before the death of the deceased, if it was derived from the same land, is held by the greater number of authorities to belong to the legatee.”
23 Neratius libro secundo responsorum. Cum quaeratur, quod sit tabernae instrumentum, interesse, quod genus negotiationis in ea exerceri solitum sit.
23 Neratius, Opinions, Book II. When the question is asked what is the equipment of a shop, it is usual to ascertain what kind of business is transacted therein.
24 Paulus libro tertio ad Neratium. Fundus, qui locatus erat, legatus est cum instrumento: instrumentum, quod colonus in eo habuit, legato cedit. Paulus: an quod coloni fuit an tantum id quod testatoris fuit? et hoc magis dicendum est, nisi nullum domini fuit.
24 Paulus, On Neratius, Book III. A tract of land which had been leased was devised with its equipment. The implements which the tenant had on the farm are included in the legacy. Paulus: Does this refer to what belonged to the tenant, or only to what belonged to the testator? It must be said that the better opinion is that this is the case, unless none of the implements belonged to the owner.
25 Iavolenus libro secundo ex posterioribus Labeonis. Fundi instrumento legato id pecus cedere putabat Tubero, quod is fundus sustinere potuisset: Labeo contra. quid enim fiet, inquit, si, cum mille oves fundus sustinere potuisset, duo milia ovium in eo fundo fuerint? quas oves potissimum legato cessuras existimabimus? nec quaerendum esse, quid debuisset parari pecoris instrumenti fundi causa, sed quid paratum esset: non enim ex numero aut multitudine legata aestimandum esse. Labeonis sententiam probo. 1Quidam cum in fundo figlinas haberet, figulorum opera maiore parte anni ad opus rusticum utebatur, deinde eius fundi instrumentum legaverat. Labeo Trebatius non videri figulos in instrumento fundi esse. 2Item cum instrumentum omne legatum esset excepto pecore, pastores oviliones, ovilia quoque legato contineri Ofilius non recte putat.
25 Javolenus, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book II. When the equipment of a tract of land is devised, Tubero thinks that all the cattle which the land can support are included in the devise. Labeo is of the contrary opinion, for he says if, when the land could support a thousand sheep, two thousand were kept there, how many of them should we decide ought to be included in the devise? No inquiry should be made as to how many sheep the testator ought to have had there for the purpose of constituting the number to be included in the devise, but how many he actually had on the land; for the estimate should not be made from the number or the amount that was left. I concur in the opinion of Labeo. 1A certain individual, who had potteries on his land, employed the services of his potters for the greater portion of the year in farm labor, and afterwards devised the land with its equipment. Labeo and Trebatius think that the potters should not be included in the equipment of the land. 2Where all the equipment of a tract of land was left with the exception of the cattle, Ofilius improperly holds that the shepherds and the sheep are included in the bequest.
26 Idem libro quinto ex posterioribus Labeonis. Dolia fictilia, item plumbea, quibus terra adgesta est, et in his viridiaria posita aedium esse Labeo Trebatius putant. ita id verum puto, si ita illigata sint aedibus, ut ibi perpetuo posita sint. 1Molas manuarias quidem suppellectilis, iumentarias autem instrumenti esse Ofilius ait. Labeo Cascellius Trebatius neutras suppellectilis, sed potius instrumenti putant esse, quod verum puto.
26 The Same, On the Last Works of Labeo, Book V. Earthenware, and leaden vessels in which earth is placed, and flowers planted in pots, Labeo and Trebatius think constitute a part of the house. I think this to be correct, if they are fastened to the house so as to always remain there. 1Ofilius says that hand-mills should be classed with household goods, but those moved by animal power are appurtenant to the land. Labeo, Cascellius, and Trebatius think that neither should be classed as household goods, but rather as appurtenances. I think that this is true.
27 Scaevola libro sexto digestorum. Praedia maritima cum servis qui ibi erunt et omni instrumento et fructibus qui ibi erunt et reliquis colonorum nutritori suo legavit. quaesitum est, an servi piscatores, qui solebant in ministerio testatoris esse et ubicumque eum sequi et urbicis rationibus expungebantur nec mortis testatoris tempore in praediis legatis deprehensi fuerant, legati esse videantur. respondit secundum ea quae proponerentur non esse legatos. 1Adfini suo ita legavit: ‘fundum Cornelianum Titio ita ut est instructus cum omnibus rebus et mancipiis et reliquis colonorum dari volo’. haec testatrix Romae litis causa ex Africa veniens mancipia quaedam ex fundo supra scripto, quo citius per hiemem operam elegeret, secum abduxit: quaesitum est, an ea mancipia fideicommisso cedant, cum quaedam ex his rusticis officiis ad tempus peregrinationis abducta sunt relictis conservabus et filiis suis et quaedam matribus et patribus. respondit mancipia, de quibus quaereretur, secundum ea quae proponerentur ex causa fideicommissi deberi. 2Idem quaesiit, an fructus eiusdem fundi, qui ibi in diem mortis coacti manserint, fideicommisso cedant, cum plenissima testatoris erga adfinem voluntas ab eo quoque manifestetur, quo reliqua colonorum eiusdem possessionis ad eum pertinere voluerit. respondit in huiusmodi scriptura posse responderi hoc solum quaerendum, an manifeste appareat defuncta id, de quo quaereretur, dari noluisse. 3Liberto, quem heredem in parte rescripsit, fundum per praeceptionem dedit in haec verba: ‘Pamphile liberte, praecipito tibique habeto fundum meum Titianum et agellum Sempronianum cum instrumento et his, quae in eodem erunt cum moriar, familiaque, quae in eo fundo moratur, exceptis quos manumisero’. quaesitum est, cum testator in eo fundo aliquantum vini in doliis habuerit, quod vivus totum vendiderat et partem tertiam pretii pro eo acceperat, an vinum in doliis remanens ad libertum ex causa praeceptionis pertineat. respondit verbis quae proponerentur contineri, nisi manifeste contrariam voluntatem coheredes approbant. in eo fundo instrumenta calendarii et nummos reliquit. responsum est de nummis quoque, ut supra responsum. 4Ita legatum est: ‘Septiciae sorori meae fundi paterni mei Seiani partem dari volo sic ut est, et alteram partem ita, ut in diem mortis fuerit’: quaesitum est, an ex verbis supra scriptis aggeres et praela iam posita parataque, ut immittantur aedificio, item instrumentum urbanum et rusticum cum mancipiis, quae fundi causa erant, ad legatarios pertineant. respondit: potest haec verba ‘sic ut est’ ad instructum referri. 5Fundos legavit in haec verba: ‘Sempronio fratri meo hoc amplius fundos meos ita, ut instructi sunt, Cassianum Nonianum cum suis salictis et silvis’. quaesitum est, cum silvae et salicta non in fundis supra scriptis, sed in adiectis agellis et quos simul testator comparavit nec sine his fundi coli possint, an legato cederent. respondit id tantum cedere legato, quod verbis comprehendisset.
27 Scævola, Digest, Book VI. A testator left to the man who had reared him his land near the sea, together with the slaves who were thereon, and all the implements and crops belonging to the same, as well as the balances due from his tenants. The question arose whether the slaves, who were fishermen, who were attached to the personal service of the testator, and accustomed to follow him everywhere, and whose names were carried on the accounts in the city, and at the time of the death of the testator were not found on the land which was devised, should be considered to have been bequeathed. The answer was that, in accordance with the facts stated, they were not bequeathed. 1A testatrix made the following bequest to one of her relatives: “I desire the Cornelian Estate, provided that everything, just as it is, together with all the personal property and slaves, and the amounts due from the tenants, to be given to Titius.” This testatrix having come, on account of a lawsuit, to Rome from Africa, brought with her certain slaves belonging to the aforesaid land, in order that she might avail herself of their services during the winter. The question arose whether the said slaves were embraced in the trust, as some of them had been removed from their duties on the farm at the time of the journey, and had left their wives and children, while others had left their fathers and mothers behind them. The answer was that, in accordance with the facts stated, the slaves which were the subject of the inquiry should be delivered under the terms of the trust. 2It was also asked whether the crops of the same tract of land which had already been gathered and remained there at the time of the death of the testatrix were included in the trust; since it was evidently her intention to display the greatest liberality towards her relative, as was proved by her desire that the balance due from the tenants should also belong to him. The answer was that, when a provision of this kind was made, it should only be ascertained whether it was perfectly clear that the deceased intended to bequeath the property with reference to which the inquiry is made. 3A testator devised a tract of land as a preferred legacy to his freedman, whom he had appointed heir to a portion of his estate, as follows: “Pamphilus, my freedman, I desire you to have, as a preferred legacy my Titian Estate, together with my small Sempronian Estate, with all their appurtenances, and the personal property which shall be there at the time of my death, together with the slaves who reside on said land, with the exception of those whom I shall hereafter manumit.” As the testator had a certain quantity of wine in casks on the said land, all of which he had sold during his lifetime, and the third part of the price of which he had received, the question arose whether the wine which remained in the casks would belong to the freedman under the terms of the preferred legacy. The answer was that, in accordance with the facts stated, it would be included, unless the co-heirs could prove that the intention of the testator was otherwise. The testator also left the claims in his account-book, and the money which was on said land. The opinion with reference to the money was the same as that above given. 4A devise was made as follows: “I desire half of the Seian Estate, which came to me from my father, to be given to my sister Septitia, just as it is at present, and the other half in the condition in which it may be found at the time of my death.” The question arose whether, under the words above quoted, the beams and joists already in position and prepared to be inserted into the building, as well as the urban and rustic equipment, and the slaves employed on the land would belong to the legatee. The answer was that the following words, “Just as it is,” can have reference to the equipment of the land. 5A testator devised certain lands as follows: “I also leave to my brother, Sempronius, my Cassian and Novian Estates, equipped just as they are, together with their willow-groves and woods.” As the woods and willow-groves did not form part of the aforesaid land, but were in small tracts adjacent to the same, which the testator had purchased at the same time and without which the former lands could not be cultivated, the question arose whether they were included in the legacy. The answer was that that property only formed part of the legacy which was specifically designated by the testator.
28 Scaevola libro vicesimo tertio digestorum. Lucius Titius fundum, uti erat instructus, legaverat. quaesitum est, fundus instructus quemadmodum dari debeat, utrum sic ut instructus fuit mortis patris familiae tempore, ut quae medio tempore adgnata aut in fundum illata sunt heredis sint? an vero instructus fundus eo tempore inspici debeat, quo factum est testamentum? an vero eo tempore, quo fundus peti coeperit, ut quidquid eo tempore instrumenti deprehendatur, legatario proficiat? respondit ea quibus instructus sit fundus secundum verba legati quae sint in eadem causa, cum dies legati cedat, instrumento contineri.
28 The Same, Digest, Book XXIII. Lucius Titius devised a tract of land with all its equipment. The question arose how it should be delivered, whether as it was equipped at the time of the death of the testator, so that any slaves born, or taken to the land in the meantime should belong to the heir; or whether as it was equipped at the time that the will was executed; or whether it should be delivered in the condition it was when the land was claimed, so that any of the equipment found there at the time would be for the benefit of the legatee. The answer was that, in accordance with the terms of the legacy, the property found on the land at the time the devise was made, and which was in the same condition when the will was opened, would be included in the equipment.
29 Labeo libro primo πιϑανῶν. Si navem cum instrumento emisti, praestari tibi debet scapha navis. Paulus: immo contra. etenim scapha navis non est instrumentum navis: etenim mediocritate, non genere ab ea differt, instrumentum autem cuiusque rei necesse est alterius generis esse atque ea quaequae sit: quod Pomponio libro septimo epistularum placuit.
29 Labeo, Probabilities, Book I. If you purchase a ship with its equipment, the boat belonging to it should be delivered to you. Paulus: By no means; for a ship’s boat is not part of its equipment, as the boat differs from it in size, but not in kind. It is necessary for the equipment of anything to be of a different description, no matter what it may be. This opinion is adopted by Pomponius, in the Seventh Book of the Epistles.