Brutus, or On Eminent Orators Passage 195

cum is hoc probare vellet, M’. Curium, cum ita heres institutus esset, si pupillus ante mortuus esset quam in suam tutelam venisset, pupillo non nato heredem esse non posse: quid ille non dixit de testamentorum iure? de antiquis formulis? quem ad modum scribi oportuisset, si etiam filio non nato heres institueretur?

He wished to prove that Manius Curius, who had been appointed heir on the condition that the ward died before coming under his own guardianship, could not be heir if no child had been born. What did he leave unsaid about the law of wills, about ancient formulas, and about how the will ought to have been written if an heir was to be appointed even in the event that no son was born?

Il voulait établir que Manius Curius, institué héritier à la condition que le pupille mourût avant d’être parvenu sous sa propre tutelle, ne pouvait être héritier si le pupille n’était pas né. Que ne dit-il pas sur le droit testamentaire? Sur les anciennes formules? Sur la manière dont il aurait fallu rédiger le testament si l’on voulait instituer un héritier même au cas où le fils ne naîtrait pas?