Corpus iurisprudentiae Romanae

Repertorium zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts

Digesta Iustiniani Augusti

Recognovit Mommsen (1870) et retractavit Krüger (1928)
Convertit in Anglica lingua Scott (1932)
Dig. XXXVII9,
De ventre in possessionem mittendo et curatore eius
Liber trigesimus septimus
IX.

De ventre in possessionem mittendo et curatore eius

(Concerning the Placing of an Unborn Child in Possession of an Estate, and his Curator.)

1Ulpianus libro quadragensimo primo ad edictum. Sicuti liberorum eorum, qui iam in rebus humanis sunt, curam praetor habuit, ita etiam eos, qui nondum nati sint, propter spem nascendi non neglexit. nam et hac parte edicti eos tuitus est, dum ventrem mittit in possessionem vice contra tabulas bonorum possessionis. 1Praegnatem esse mulierem oportet omnimodo nec dicere se praegnatem sufficit: quare nec tenet datio bonorum possessionis, nisi vere praegnas fuit et mortis tempore et eo, quo mitti in possessionem petit. 2Totiens autem mittitur in possessionem venter, si non est exheredatus et id quod in utero erit inter suos heredes futurum erit. sed et si incertum sit, aliquo tamen casu possit existere, quo qui editur suus futurus sit, ventrem mittemus: aequius enim est vel frustra nonnumquam impendia fieri quam denegari aliquando alimenta ei, qui dominus bonorum aliquo casu futurus est. 3Quare et si ita exheredatio facta sit: ‘si mihi filius unus nascetur, exheres esto’, quia filia nasci potest vel plures filii vel filius et filia, venter in possessionem mittetur: satius est enim sub incerto eius qui edetur ali etiam eum qui exheredatus sit, quam eum qui non sit exheredatus fame necari: ratumque esse debet, quod deminutum est, quamvis is nascatur, qui repellitur. 4Idem erit dicendum et si mulier, quae fuit in possessione, abortum fecisset. 5Sed et si sub condicione postumus sit exheredatus, pendente condicione Pedii sententiam admittimus existimantis posse ventrem in possessionem mitti, quia sub incerto utilius est ventrem ali. 6Si venter ab institutis exheredatus sit, a substitutis praeteritus, Marcellus negat in possessionem eum mitti posse viventibus institutis, quia exheredatus est: quod verum est. 7Per contrarium autem si ab institutis praeteritus sit venter, a substitutis exheredatus, vivis institutis mittendus est in possessionem: quod si non vivant, negat mittendum, quia ad eum gradum devoluta hereditas est, a quo exheredatus est. 8Si filius ab hostibus captus sit, uxor eius praegnas in possessionem soceri bonorum mittenda est: nam aliquo casu spes est id quod nascitur inter suos heredes futurum, ut puta si pater eius apud hostes decedat. 9Sed et si quis ventrem exheredasset: ‘qui mihi intra menses tres mortis meae natus erit, exheres esto’ vel ‘qui post tres menses’, venter in possessionem utique mittetur, quia aliquo casu suus heres futurus est: et sane benigniorem esse praetorem in hanc partem oportebit, ne qui speratur ante vitam necetur. 10Rectissime autem praetor nusquam uxoris fecit mentionem, quia fieri potest, ut mortis tempore uxor non fuerit, quae se ex eo praegnatem dicit. 11Etiam ex emancipato venter ad possessionem admittitur. unde apud Iulianum libro vicensimo septimo digestorum quaeritur, si emancipatus quis sit uxore iam praegnate, deinde decessisset et pater eius mortuus sit, an venter in possessionem emancipati patris mitti possit. et rectissime scripsit rationem non esse, cur venter, quem edictum admittit, repelli debeat: est enim aequissimum partui consuli, qui natus bonorum possessionem accepturus est. sed et si avus viveret, similiter ventrem admittemus. 12Si filius in adoptionem datus decesserit praegnate uxore, tunc deinde adoptator defunctus fuerit, mittetur venter in possessionem avi adoptivi. sed an etiam in eius, qui in adoptionem dederat filium, mittetur, videamus: et si hic nepos postumus heres ab avo naturali institutus sit, mittetur in possessionem, quia et nato ei, si nemo ex liberis sit alius bonorum possessio secundum tabulas dari potest, aut, si sint liberi praeteriti, etiam contra tabulas cum ipsis potest accipere. 13Si pater nuru praegnate filium emancipaverit, non in totum repelli uterus debet: namque natus solet patri ex novo edicto iungi. et generaliter quibus casibus patri iungitur natus, admittendus est venter in possessionem. 14Si ea, quae in possessionem vult ire, uxor negetur vel nurus vel esse vel fuisse vel ex eo praegnas non esse contendatur: decretum interponit praetor ad exemplum Carboniani edicti. et ita divus Hadrianus Claudio Proculo praetori rescripsit, ut summatim de re cognosceret et, si manifesta calumnia videbitur eius, quae ventris nomine in possessione mitti desiderat, nihil novi decerneret: si dubitari de re poterit, operam daret, ne praeiudicium fiat ei, quod in utero est, sed ventrem in possessionem mitti oportet. apparet itaque, nisi manifesta sit calumniatrix mulier, debere eam decretum eligere: et ubi omnino iuste dubitari poterit, an ex eo praegnas sit, decreto tuenda est, ne praeiudicium partui fiat. idemque est et si status mulieri controversia fiat. 15Et generaliter ex quibus causis Carbonianam bonorum possessionem puero praetor dare solitus est, ex hisdem causis ventri quoque subvenire praetorem debere non dubitamus, eo facilius, quod favorabilior est causa partus quam pueri: partui enim in hoc favetur, ut in lucem producatur, puero, ut in familiam inducatur: partus enim iste alendus est, qui et si non tantum parenti, cuius esse dicitur, verum etiam rei publicae nascitur. 16Si quis prima uxore praegnate facta mox aliam duxerit eamque praegnatem fecerit diemque suum obierit, edictum ambobus sufficiet, videlicet cum nemo contendit nec calumniatricem dicit. 17Quotiens autem venter in possessionem mittitur, solet mulier curatorem ventri petere, solet et bonis. sed si quidem tantum ventri curator datus sit, creditoribus permittendum in custodia bonorum esse: si vero non tantum ventri, sed etiam bonis curator datus est, possunt esse securi creditores, cum periculum ad curatorem pertineat. idcirco curatorem bonis ex inquisitione dandum, idoneum scilicet, oportet creditores curare vel si quis alius est, qui non edito partu successionem speret. 18Hoc autem iure utimur, ut idem curator et bonis et ventri detur: sed si creditores instant vel qui sperat se successurum, diligentius atque circumspectius id fieri debebit et plures, si desiderentur, dandi sunt. 19Mulier autem in possessionem missa ea sola, sine quibus fetus sustineri et ad partum usque produci non possit, sumere ex bonis debet: et in hanc rem curator constituendus est, qui cibum potum vestitum tectum mulieri praestet pro facultatibus defuncti et pro dignitate eius atque mulieris. 20Deminutio autem ad hos sumptus fieri debet primum ex pecunia numerata: si ea non fuerit, ex his rebus, quae patrimonia onerare magis impendio quam augere fructibus consueverunt. 21Item si periculum est, ne interim res usu capiantur, ne debitores tempore liberentur, idem curare debet. 22Ita igitur curam hoc quoque officio administrabit, quo solent curatores atque tutores pupillorum. 23Eligitur autem curator aut ex his, qui tutores dati sunt postumo, aut ex necessariis adfinibusque aut ex substitutis aut ex amicis defuncti aut ex creditoribus, sed utique is, qui idoneus videbitur: aut si de personis eorum quaestio moveatur, vir bonus eligitur. 24Quod si nondum sit curator constitutus (quia plerumque aut non petitur aut tardius petitur aut serius datur), Servius aiebat res hereditarias heredem institutum vel substitutum obsignare non debere, sed tantum pernumerare et mulieri adsignare. 25Idem ait ad custodienda ea, quae sine custodia salva esse non possunt, custodem ab herede ponendum (ut puta pecoris, et si nondum messis vindemiave facta sit): et si fuerit controversia, quantum deminui oporteat, arbitrum dandum. 26Curatore autem constituto haec omnia cessare puto: conscribere tamen curatori debent et vendenti et inventarium rerum facienti. 27Tamdiu autem venter in possessionem esse debet, quamdiu aut pariat aut abortum faciat aut certum sit eam non esse praegnatem. 28Et si sciens prudensque se praegnatem non esse consumpserit, de suo eam id consumpsisse Labeo ait.

1Ulpiamis, On the Edict, Book XLI. The Prætor not only provides for the welfare of children who are already born, but also does not neglect those who are as yet unborn; for he protects their interests in one of the Sections of the Edict by placing an unborn child in possession of an estate instead of prætorian possession contrary to the terms of the will. 1It is absolutely necessary that the woman should be pregnant, and it is not sufficient for her to merely allege that she is in this condition. Therefore, such a grant of the possession of an estate is not valid, unless she was actually pregnant at the time of the death of the testator, on account of which she demands to be placed in possession. 2An unborn child is placed in possession of an estate whenever it is not disinherited, and where it will afterwards be included among the proper heirs. When, however, it is uncertain whether this will be the case, we sometimes place the unborn child in possession, if it may, under certain circumstances, become a proper heir; as it is sometimes more equitable for unnecessary expenses to be incurred than for maintenance to be refused to one who may become the owner of the estate. 3Therefore, if disinheritance is expressed in the following terms, “If a son should be born to me, let him be disinherited,” because a daughter may be born, or several sons, or a son and a daughter, and in either of these cases the unborn child will be placed in possession of the estate; for, while it is still uncertain what the birth will be, it is better for the child that has been disinherited to be supported than for one which may not be disinherited to perish with hunger, and any diminution of the estate made on this account ought to be ratified, even though the child who was excluded from the succession should be born. 4The same rule will apply if the woman who was in possession of the estate should have a miscarriage. 5If, however, the posthumous child was disinherited under a condition while the condition is pending, we adopt the opinion of Pedius, who held that the unborn child should be placed in possession of the estate; because, in case of uncertainty, it is always better for it to be supported. 6Where an unborn child is disinherited in the first place, and passed over as a substitute, Marcellus denies that it can be placed in possession while the appointed heirs are living, for the reason that it was disinherited; which is true. 7On the other hand, if an unborn child is passed over, as one of the appointed heirs, and is disinherited as a substitute, it should be placed in possession of the estate while the appointed heirs are living. If, however, they are not living, he says that this should not be done, because the estate passes to the degree in which the child was disinherited. 8Where a son has been captured by the enemy, and his wife is pregnant, she should be placed in possession of the estate of her father-in-law, for a case might occur where the child, after its birth, may become a direct heir; as, for instance, if its father should die in the hands of the enemy. 9If, however, anyone should disinherit an unborn child as follows, “If a child should be born to me within three months after my death, let it be disinherited,” or “After three months,” the unborn child is placed in possession because there is a chance that it may become a direct heir. In cases of this kind, the Prætor should always be very indulgent, in order that the child whose birth is expected may not die before it is born. 10Again, the Prætor never mentions the name of the wife, because it may happen that the woman who alleges that she is pregnant by her husband may not have been his wife at the time of his death. 11The unborn child of an emancipated son also may obtain possession of his estate. Therefore, in the Twenty-seventh Book of the Digest, the question is asked, if a son who was emancipated while his wife was pregnant, should afterwards die, and his father should also die, whether the unborn child can be placed in possession of the estate of his emancipated father. And he very correctly says that there is no reason why the unborn child whom the Edict permits to obtain possession should be excluded from it; for it is perfectly just to provide for the child who, after its birth, will be entitled to possession of the estate. If its grandfather should still be living, we also permit the unborn child to obtain possession of the estate of its father. 12If a son who is given in adoption should die, leaving his wife pregnant, and then the adoptive father should die, the unborn child will be placed in possession of the estate of his adoptive father. Let us, however, see whether he should also be placed in possession, of the estate of the father who gave his son in adoption. If this posthumous grandson is appointed heir of his natural grandfather, he will be placed in possession of his estate, because if there was no other child at the time of his birth, prætorian possession in accordance with the provisions of the will could be given him; or if there were other children, who had been passed over, he could, also, along with them obtain prætorian possession in opposition to the terms of the will. 13If a father should emancipate his son while his daughter-in-law is pregnant, the unborn child ought not to absolutely be excluded; for, after it has been born, it can be joined with the father under the new clause of the Edict. And, generally speaking, in those cases where a child, after its birth, can be joined with its father in the succession, it should be permitted to obtain possession before it is born. 14Where the woman who desires to be placed in possession of an estate is not the wife of the testator, nor his daughter-in-law, nor has ever sustained such a relation to him, or it is asserted that she is not pregnant by him, the prætor will render a decree, as under the Carbonian Edict. This the Divine Hadrian stated in a Rescript addressed to the Prætor, Claudius Proculus, directing him to assume summary jurisdiction of the case; and if it was evident that the woman who desired to be placed in possession of the estate in the name of her unborn child had been guilty of fraud, he must not decide in her favor. If, however, any doubt should exist, he was ordered to be careful not to cause any injury to the unborn child, but to place it in possession of the estate. Hence, it appears that, unless the woman was evidently guilty of deceit, she could demand a decision of the Prætor; and in case there should be any reasonable doubt as to whether she was pregnant by her husband, she must be protected by a decree, in order that the rights of the unborn child might not be prejudiced. The same rule is applicable where a controversy arises with reference to the social status of the woman. 15Generally speaking, we do not doubt that the Prætor should come to the relief of an unborn child in all those instances in which he is accustomed to grant possession under the Carbonian Decree where the child is already born; and this is done the more readily because the case of an unborn child is treated with greater indulgence than that of one who is already born; for this preference is conceded to the former in order that it may be brought into the world. A child is favored after it is born in order that it may be reared in the family, and an unborn child must be supported, because if he is not the son of his alleged father he will still be born to the State. 16If anyone, after having rendered his first wife pregnant, marries a second, and also renders her pregnant, and then dies, the Edict will suffice for both cases, provided no one disputes the right of either of the women, or accuses either of fraud. 17Moreover, whenever an unborn child is placed in possession of an estate, the mother usually asks that a curator be appointed for it, as well as for the estate. If, however, a curator is only appointed for the child, the creditors of the estate will be permitted to take charge of the property for safe keeping; but if a curator is appointed, not only for the child, but also for the estate, the creditors may rest secure, as the curator must assume the responsibility. Hence a curator should be appointed for the estate after an examination as to its solvency; and the creditors, or any other person interested in it, must see that the curator is solvent, and is not one who will be entitled to the succession, in case the child should not be born. 18The present practice is to appoint the same curator for both the property and the child. If, however, creditors, or anyone who has hopes of succeeding to the estate appears, the appointment should be made more carefully and circumspectly, and several curators should be appointed, if this is requested. 19Moreover, a woman who is placed in possession of an estate should take from the property only those things without which her child cannot be either nourished or born; and it is for this purpose that a curator ought to be appointed who will furnish food, drink, clothing, and lodging to the woman, in proportion to the means and rank of the deceased, and that of the woman. 20The deduction required for these expenses should be first made from the ready money belonging to the estate, and, if there is none, from the property which causes the greatest expense to the estate rather than from that which increases it by its income. 21Again, if there is any danger that some of the property may be obtained by usucaption, or debtors of the estate be released from liability by lapse of time, the curator must also attend to these matters. 22Therefore he must discharge the duties of his office just as the curators and guardians of wards are accustomed to do. 23A curator is selected from among those who have been appointed guardians pf a posthumous child; or from the near relatives and connections; or from the substitutes; or from the friends or creditors of the deceased. A person who is considered solvent should be chosen; and if there is any question as to the personal character of those above mentioned, an honorable man must be selected. 24If no curator should yet be appointed (for the reason that frequently application is not made for one, or it is made too late, or the appointment is made too late), Servius says that the testamentary heir or the substitute need not seal up the property, but shall make an inventory of it, and assign to the woman what she may require. 25He also says that a custodian ought to be appointed by the heir to take care of such property as cannot otherwise be preserved; as for instance, flocks or grain, and vintages, where the crops have not been gathered. If any controversy should arise as to how much should be taken from the estate, an arbiter must be appointed. 26I think that all this is disposed of when a curator has been appointed; the bills of sale and the inventory of the estate should, however, be signed by him. 27The unborn child should remain in possession until it comes into the world; or the mother has a miscarriage; or until it is certain that she is not pregnant. 28If she, being well aware that she was not pregnant, should use part of the estate, Labeo says that it should be taken out of her property.

2Paulus libro quadragensimo primo ad edictum. Sed et si eum ediderit qui repulsus est, discedere debet.

2Paulus, On the Edict, Book XLI. If she should have a child that has been excluded from the estate, she must withdraw.

3Hermogenianus libro tertio iuris epitomarum. Sumptus autem ab ea facti bona fide non repetuntur.

3Hermogenianus, Epitomes of Law, Book III. Where any expense has been incurred by her in good faith, it should not be recovered from her.

4Paulus libro quadragensimo primo ad edictum. Habitatio quoque, si domum defunctus non habuit, conducenda erit mulieri. 1Servis quoque mulieris, qui necessarii sunt ad ministerium eius secundum dignitatem, cibaria praestanda sunt.

4Paulus, On the Edict, Book XLI. A lodging, also, must be rented for the woman, if the deceased did not have a house. 1The slaves of the woman likewise must be provided with subsistence—where they are necessary for her service—in accordance with her social rank.

5Gaius libro quarto decimo ad edictum provinciale. Curator ventris alimenta mulieri statuere debet. nec ad rem pertinet, an dotem habeat, unde sustentare se possit, quia videntur quae ita praestantur ipsi praestari qui in utero est. 1Curator ventri datus solvendi debiti rationem habere debet, utique eius, quod sub poena aut pignoribus pretiosis debetur.

5Gaius, On the Provincial Edict, Book XIV. The curator of the unborn child should also provide the woman with maintenance; for it makes no difference whether she has a dowry by means of which she can support herself, or not, because what is furnished her is considered to have been given for her unborn child. 1Where a curator is appointed for an unborn child, he should take care to pay the debts of the estate, especially those whose non-payment involve pecuniary penalties, or where valuable pledges have been deposited as security.

6Ulpianus libro quadragensimo primo ad edictum. Extraneo postumo herede instituto non aliter venter in possessionem mittitur, nisi mater aliunde se alere non possit, ne forte ei, qui natus bonorum possessor futurus est, denegasse alimenta videamur.

6Ulpianus, On the Edict, Book XLI. Where a posthumous heir is appointed who is a stranger, the unborn child will not be placed in possession of the estate unless its mother cannot support herself otherwise; for we hold that maintenance should not be denied to one who, after his birth, will become the possessor of the estate.

7Idem libro quadragensimo septimo ad edictum. Ubicumque ab intestato admittitur quis, illic et venter admittitur, scilicet si talis fuerit is qui in utero est, ut, si in rebus humanis esset, bonorum possessionem petere posset: ut in omnibus partibus edicti pro superstite habeatur is qui in utero est. 1Interdum non passim, sed cum causae cognitione mitti venter in possessionem debet, si qui sit, qui controversiam referat. sed hoc tantum ad eum ventrem erit referendum, qui cum liberis admittitur. ceterum si mittatur unde legitimi vel qua alia ex parte, dicendum est non esse causae cognitionem necessariam: nec enim aequum est in tempus pubertatis ventrem vesci de alieno in tempus pubertatis dilata controversia. sed enim placet omnes controversias, quae quasi status controversiam continent, in tempus pubertatis differri, sed non ut in possessione sit status controversia dilata, sed sine possessione. 2Quamvis autem praetor ventrem in possessionem mittat cum his, quibus possessionem dederit, attamen etiam solus venter admittetur ad bonorum possessionem.

7The Same, On the Edict, Book XLI. Whenever anyone becomes an heir ab intestato, in this instance also, an unborn child is permitted to obtain possession of the estate; that is to say, if it is such a child that when it is born, it will be entitled to prætorian possession; and in all the Sections of the Edict an unborn child is considered as a survivor. 1Sometimes, but not indiscriminately, an unborn child should not be placed in possession of the estate; but only after proper cause is shown, where anyone contests its right. This, however, merely has reference to an unborn child who, with other children of the deceased, can obtain possession. But if it should be placed in possession as the next of kin, or under any other Section of the Edict, it must be said that an investigation will not be necessary; for it is not just that the child should be supported by the property of another until it arrives at puberty, because the settlement of the controversy should be deferred until that time. It is established that all controversies relating to the condition of children must be postponed until they arrive at puberty; not that the child can remain in possession during the existence of the disputes, but that the delay should be without possession. 2Moreover, although the Prætor can place the unborn child in possession of the estate, along with those to whom he has already granted it; still, the unborn child alone may be permitted to hold possession of the property.

8Paulus libro primo de adulteris. Si ventris nomine mulier missa sit in possessionem, divus Hadrianus Calpurnio Flacco differendam accusationem adulterii rescripsit, ne quod praeiudicium fieret nato.

8Paulus, On Adultery, Book I. Where a woman is placed in possession of an estate in the name of her unborn child, the Divine Hadrian stated in a Rescript addressed to Calpurnius Flaccus that an accusation of adultery should be postponed, in order that no wrong may be done to the child.

9Ulpianus libro quinto decimo ad Sabinum. Cum venter mittitur in possessionem, quod in ventris alimenta deminutum est detrahitur velut aes alienum.

9Ulpianus, On Sabinus, Book XV. Where an unborn child is placed in possession of an estate, what is taken from the estate for its support should be deducted as a debt.

10Paulus libro septimo quaestionum. Postumus natus quocumque tempore, qui tamen testatoris morte conceptus iam erit, potest agnoscere bonorum possessionem: nam et ventrem praetor ex omnibus partibus edicti mittit in possessionem bonorum, non missurus scilicet, si ei nato daturus non esset bonorum possessionem.

10Paulus, Questions, Book VII. A posthumous child, no matter when it may be born, provided it was conceived at the time of the death of the testator, can obtain prætorian possession of the estate, for the Prætor places it in possession under all the Sections of the Edict by which it may obtain it, but it will not be placed in possession, if, after its birth, it is not entitled to it.