Ancient Rome and Modern America; A Comparative Study of Morals and MannersFerrero, Guglielmo
History
Ancient Rome and Modern America; A Comparative Study of Morals and Manners
Ferrero, Guglielmo
America -- Civilization; Europe -- Civilization; Justice, Administration of -- Rome; Progress
Nevertheless, no one, not even Cato, could delude himself
into thinking that the College of Pontiffs would condemn Clodius
to death. Consequently, the law proposed to constitute a special
tribunal,—which would not be that of the Pontiffs, nor the usual jury,
chosen by lot. The Prætor would himself constitute it, choosing it from
the panel of judges. It was hoped in this way to contrive a Court which
would condemn Clodius at least to exile.
It is not difficult to realise how daring and dangerous it was to
propose such a _privilegium_, as the Romans used to call exceptional
laws, in times of uproar like those, and in the midst of the fierce
discords which already for so many reasons were splitting up the
Roman aristocracy. But the indignation and commotion of the public,
superstitious and fearful as it was, were too lively. Cæsar himself
had felt the necessity of throwing a sop to the public by divorcing
Pompeia; and the Senate dared not reject the rash proposal, even though
many wise men, like Cicero, thought that it would be more prudent to
let Clodius fry in his own grease. The two Consuls were invited to
draft the law and to get it approved by the people.
From this moment, however, difficulties began; and, in a few weeks,
the prosecution of Clodius assumed a new aspect. It became a political
matter. That the act he had committed was an abominable one, no one in
Rome denied; but that in order to secure his punishment a law should
be passed which would not only be a special one, but—most important
point of all—would introduce the principle of the selection of judges
by the Prætor,—no, to this the Popular, Democratic party could not
consent. Always concerned not to leave in the hands of Sulla’s party,
which was still so powerful in the Senate and throughout the Republic,
too many weapons to employ against their enemies, the Popular party
had recently taken to demanding with the utmost emphasis the most
rigorous observance of legal forms, especially in proceedings in
the law-courts, which were such a convenient means, in the hands of
the preponderant party, of getting rid of the latter’s adversaries.
In fact, at that moment the Popular party had begun an agitation
against the illegalities committed in the course of the repression of
Catiline’s conspiracy. This law, therefore, sounded like a challenge.
As a matter of fact, of the two Consuls whose duty it was to bring
it forward, one, Marcus Pupius Piso, though he had not dared resist
the proposal openly in the Senate, was opposed to it; and, while he
made a show of obeying the orders of the Senate and actually did,
with his colleague, propose the law, he busied himself behind the
scenes to secure its rejection. The other Consul, Marcus Valerius
Messala, on the other hand, was an enthusiastic supporter of the law;
but it was whispered about that a tribune of the _plebs_, if the law
was brought forward, would veto it. Clodius and his relations worked
away vigorously.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account