The first-named difficulty was met very imperfectly by testator's fixing a period for the heir to make his decision (cretio); afterwards by statute (529) allowing an heir a year for deliberation without his losing the right, if he died before decision, of transmitting to his child or other successor his claim to the inheritance. But a still more effective remedy was enacted in 531. The heir was empowered, under suitable precautions for accuracy and after inviting the presence of creditors and legatees, to make an inventory and valuation of the assets of the deceased, and was then not bound to discharge debts and legacies beyond that total amount. He need not distribute the value of the estate pro rata to the claimants, but (unless fully aware of the insufficiency of the estate) could pay them in the order of their application. Then creditors who had any right or priority could proceed against any posterior to themselves who had received payment, or against holders of any property specifically pledged to them, and all creditors not satisfied could proceed against legatees who had been paid out of what turned out to be insufficient to cover the debts. This provision for limiting the heir's liability was called "the benefit of an inventory," and heirs were thus no longer prevented from promptly accepting an inheritance which might turn out to be ruinous.
Further difficulty arose from legacies and freedoms left in the will. Testator's estate might be able to meet the debts, but if there were many or heavy charges for bequests, there might be nothing left to make it worth while for the heir to accept the inheritance, and the will might therefore be nullified. Several attempts to meet this difficulty were made, but nothing effectual, until a Lex Falcidia was passed c. B.C. 40. This law, as interpreted by the lawyers, allowed the heir or heirs, if necessary, to reduce the amount of each legacy by so much as would leave the heir or heirs collectively one-fourth of the inheritance in value, the value being taken as at the time of death after deducting the value of slaves freed, the debts, and funeral expenses. If any legacies lapsed or other gain accrued to the heirs from the estate, this would be counted towards the Falcidian fourth (as it was called). By this arrangement the heir was sure of getting something, if he accepted a solvent inheritance. And as, if he refused, the will would drop and the legacies be lost, the legatees might be willing to accept possibly a further deduction to prevent intestacy. The application of the Falcidian law had been so thoroughly worked out by the lawyers that Justinian seems to have found little occasion for further enactment, except (535) to provide for the presence of the legatees or their agents at taking the inventory, with power to put the heir on his oath and to examine the slaves by torture for the purpose of getting full information. An heir neglecting to make an inventory was liable to creditors in full and could not use the Falcidian against the legatees. In 544 Justinian directed that the Falcidian should not apply to any immovable which testator had
