The Same, On Second Wills. Anyone can appoint an heir as follows: “If I die in my seventieth year, let So-and-So be my heir.” In this instance, the person executing the will should not be considered to be partly testate, but to have made the appointment under a condition.

Paulus, On Pupillary Substitutions. Where a man has several children, he can substitute an heir for any of them, and it is not necessary for him to do so for all; just as he can make a substitution for one of them. 1Therefore, he can make a substitution for a short period during the lifetime of his heir; for instance, “If my son should die before reaching the age of ten years, let Titius be his heir”. 2Moreover, the substitution will be admitted if he appoints several heirs for different terms of the age of the son, as, for example: “If he should die before reaching the age of ten years, let Titius be his heir; if he should die after his tenth year, but before reaching his fourteenth, let Mævius be his heir.” 3Where an heir appointed by a father, who has been charged with delivery of the estate, enters upon it, after having been compelled to do so by the beneficiary of the trust, although the other bequests mentioned in the will may be confirmed by this acceptance, as for example, legacies, and grants of freedom; still, where the will has become inoperative under the Civil Law, the pupillary substitution included therein is not revived; as Quintus Cervidius Scævola held. Many authorities, however, are of a different opinion, for the reason that the pupillary substitution is a part of the former will; and this is the practice at present.

Paulus, On Pupillary Substitutions. The substitute of a disinherited son cannot legally be charged with a legacy. Therefore, the heir-at-law of a disinherited son cannot be charged with a trust, because heirs-at-law are only compelled to discharge the duties of a trust where they have also been appointed heirs. If, however, one of the children should take advantage of the Edict of the Prætor, by which possession is promised in opposition to the provisions of the will, and the appointed heir should also demand possession contrary to its provisions, the substitute of the first of the children must pay the legacies, just as if a patrimonial estate had come Into the hands of the son for whom he was substituted, and as if the son had received from his father that to which he was entitled and had acquired through possession of the estate under the Prætorian Law. 1Where a posthumous child is charged with a legacy as follows, “If he becomes my heir,” and no posthumous child should be born, the substitutes can enter upon the estate; and it must be held that they owe the legacies for which the posthumous child would have been responsible, if it had been born.