To: Mr. Zeilberger and Cr. Ekhad, Dear Sirs, Having downloaded your article bastard.tex, I wanted to give you precisions about the french legacy law. This is a complex part of the law (Articles 724 to 1100 of the French "Code Civil") and I am not a specialist. I feel that in general these laws lack pity, clarity, straightforwardness and proper organization. The part on undivided property among others is an awful mess. As I do not know the english legal jargon (neither do I know much of the english language), I can only hope that my quick summary is understandable to you. Discretional part ----------------- There is a general protection of heirs in the french law which creates the concept of discretional part (quotite disponible). This is the part that someone can give away or bequeath to somebody directly. Art 913,914: One cannot give away or bequeath freely more than ** 1/(n+1) of one's possession where n<=3 is the number of children (legal or not) ** 1/4 if there is more than 3 children. (legal or not) ** 1/2 if there are ascendants in both his mother's and father's line ** 3/4 if there are ascendants in only one of his parents line Art 920,921sq: If the discretional part exceeds what is permitted by law, the heirs can ask for reduction after the death. General Equality ---------------- As a neighboor of D. Foata reported, since law of 3 Janv. 1972, which has revised most articles of the legacy system, most inequalities between natural and legal children have been supressed. In particular, it has supressed the distinction between natural, adulterine and incestuous children. Art 745 states that all children inherits equal portions and "by head" (Is this a provision made for siamese brothers ?) Art 750-755 give the rules for the part of siblings of the deceased (when he had no children). Art 757-758 states that a natural child has generaly the same right to his parents and siblings legacy as a legal child and reciprocally. Is 1/2 more equal than 1/3 ? ---------------------------- but there is still several articles which creates a difference, based on the idea of the protection of the legal children and spouse. One can roughly say that, the 1/3rd coefficient of Catalan times is now 1/2. Art 759: if a natural children was conceived while his deceased parent was maried and if the marriage is still in force at the death, then they will receive only one half of what the spouse would have received if they were not present. Art 760: if a natural children was conceived while one of the parents was maried and if this parent had legal children from this marriage, then he inherits *half* the part of the legacy he should have received if all the deceased's children (including him) were legal children. The parts not given to natural children will be divided evenly among the legal ones. Art 761: legal children and the surviving spouse have a preferential right to chose their part of the legacy corresponding to their rights (for instance the house). Art 762 and 763: the parent of natural children can decide while he is living of the part of his legacy that will be used for the inheritance of his natural children, the part being eventually adjusted during the calculus of the legacy after death. Art 908: enforces article 759 and 760 by forbidding that a natural children could receive more than the part calculated by these articles, even by mean of the discretional part. But a legal children can receive a part of the discretional part in addition of his legal rights if his parent states explicitely that he means so (art 919). Art 915: repeats 759 and 760 and explicits 913. It says also that a natural children in the need can request for exchange of his rights to the legacy for a pension and that the legal children can decide to settle the affair by giving him a 'legal child' part. Art 1094: give additional rules for giving or bequathing to the spouse, depending on whether there are natural children. There are even almost mathematical statements in the law: Art. 740: "La repr'esentation a lieu a` l'infini dans la ligne directe descendante." "Representation takes place at infinity in the direct descending line" The multi-mistress case ----------------------- Although the "plusieurs amantes" phrase is prefectly correct, it sounds more 17-th than 19-th. One could say "plusieurs ma{\^\i}tresses". As the law articles I have quoted imply, and despite the interesting generality of the case from a mathematical point of view, each natural children could have asked for exactly the same treatment as the others up to the exact proportion disposed by law. I presume (but my knowledge is essentially movie-based) that in the U.S.A. there is much more freedom in the way one can dispose of one's own possession. In France, you cannot desinherit an heir. The only ways are (to my knowledge) to make him charge you falsely with a capital crime, murder you, try to murder you or not denouncing your murderer if he knows him. This limits the possibilities. After all these charming considerations, I want to thank you for the pleasure I had to read (alas not always to understand in depth for the moment) many of the articles I have retrieved from your home page. Yours faithfully, Olivier Gerard Editor in Chief Quadrature Mathematics Quarterly