Terentius Clemens, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. Where anyone who has been designated an heir to the entire estate is for some legal reason incapable of acquiring it, and was appointed by a party who died insolvent, Julianus is of the opinion that he can inherit the whole estate, for the law is not applicable to the estate of one who was insolvent.

Terentius Clemens, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. Where anyone who is not capable of acquiring the entire estate of the testator is substituted for the son of the latter who has not yet reached the age of puberty, he can acquire the entire estate for the reason that he obtains it through the minor. Our Julianus holds that this opinion should be interpreted in such a way that the party in question will not be entitled to all the property of the testator. If, however, anything should subsequently be acquired by the minor from another source, or if he should be disinherited, the substitute will not be prevented from acquiring the estate, since he obtains it from the minor.

The Same, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. Where an heir is charged with a legacy to be paid to the wife of the testator instead of her dowry, with the intention of compensating her therefor, and she prefers to have her dowry rather than the legacy, the question arises whether an action to recover the dowry should be granted her against all the heirs, or only against the one charged with the payment of the legacy. Julianus thinks that the action should first be granted against the one who was charged with the payment of the legacy; for as she ought either to be content with her rights, or with the bequest of her husband, it is only just that he whom her husband charged with the payment of the legacy, instead of her dowry, should sustain the burden of the debt to the amount of the legacy, and that the remaining part of the dowry should be paid by the heirs. 1The same principle will apply if the woman, having been appointed heir in lieu of receiving her dowry, should reject the estate, in order that an action might be granted her against the substitute. This is correct. 2It may, however, seriously be doubted, where the legacy and the Falcidian Law are involved, whether he against whom alone an action to recover the dowry is granted will personally be obliged to pay the entire legacy, just as if all the heirs had paid the dowry, or whether the entire dowry should be included in the debts of the estate, because the action for its recovery is granted against him alone. This, indeed, seems to be the most reasonable conclusion.

Terentius Clemens, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. Children born to a woman by another person after the decease of her husband will still be allowed to receive a legacy, if the testator expressly stated that this should be the case. 1Where a bequest was made of more than the law allowed to a certain person who could not receive the entire amount, “if he should pay something to the heir,” the question arose whether what he gave for the purpose of complying with the condition could be acquired by virtue of the legacy, for the reason that he did not receive what he paid to the heir; or whether what he paid should be considered in excess of the legacy, and therefore that he will not be entitled to any more of the estate of the testator than he would have been if the legacy had been bequeathed unconditionally. Julianus very properly thinks that he will be entitled to as much more of the legacy as he may have paid for the purpose of complying with the condition, nor does it make any difference whether he was directed to make payment to the heir, or to a stranger; because after the calculation, which he is always obliged to make, is completed, no more will remain for him than the share authorized by the law. 2Where a man bequeaths an annual legacy to his wife under the condition that she shall not marry as long as she has children; what is the rule of law? Julianus answers that the woman can marry and take the legacy. If, however, the testator provided that she should not marry as long as her children were under the age of puberty, the rule would not apply; because the duty of caring for the children, rather than remaining in the state of widowhood, was enjoined by the testator.

Terentius Clemens, On the Lex Julia et Papia, Book IV. Whenever more is bequeathed to any person than he is legally entitled to receive, and the Falcidian Law is applicable, the amount due under it must first be estimated, so that, after what is excepted by the Falcidian Law has been deducted, the balance will be payable, if it does not exceed the amount specified by law.