This library is built in the open.
If you spot an error, have a suggestion, or just want to say hello — we’d love to hear from you.
Tuscarus, Nicolaus · 1589

is destitute; by the newest law, even if the husband's blood relatives exist, the wife will succeed, and conversely, together with common children, or those of another marriage, to one-fourth of the entire estate, if there are three or fewer: but if there are more, to an equal portion.
The same seems to be said if a dowry was given, but is very small, so that the survivor is forced to labor in poverty.
Which, however, all must be taken with a grain of salt a metaphorical expression meaning to treat with caution, so that they have only the usufruct of that fourth or equal portion, but preserve the ownership for the children of the same marriage: if these do not exist, or if they have had none at all, they will also enjoy the ownership of that portion.
Clearly, in the succession of such spouses, the marriage contract must be attended to first, if any has been interposed. If this is omitted, the custom and statutes of each place (as in other degrees of legitimate succession) must be observed.
Furthermore, by the right of affinity, no succession is granted.
But most recently, if no one is left to whom legitimate succession is owed, or to whom the Law gives goods, or if they neglect the inheritance, the goods are considered vacant, and are deferred to the Treasury: which is called a universal successor, and not an heir; and which is excluded by the persons enumerated above, even in the goods of the condemned, unless the Law decrees otherwise due to the hatred or atrocity of the crimes.
Having briefly explained the modes of succeeding by intestacy, it follows that, since the nature of relatives is various, and inheritances return to the closest ones, we should examine who are more powerful and closer in succeeding.