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
All the wise and prudent men, even Cicero, held
themselves in reserve, keeping an eye on the progress of events without
compromising themselves too far; so that Cicero, writing at the end of
January, 61, to Atticus, could give him to understand between the lines
that the law would never be passed, and that the whole business would
be brought to a stand-still by the fizzing away of the public anger.
For the rest, this was the secret wish of all level-headed citizens,
who, like Cicero, feared dreadful calamities, if the business were
allowed to assume more serious proportions.
But all the wiseacres reckoned without Cato and the Pietist party,
and without the obstinacy of Messala, who, irritated by the stolid
opposition of his colleague, countered it with a determined effort to
get the law passed. Between them all, they worked and spoke with such
effect that they succeeded in obtaining the support of Pompey, and
in bringing the law before the _comitia_ in the first fortnight of
February. Piso, however, was no less resolutely determined than Messala
that the law he had proposed should not be passed, and, as it was his
turn to preside over the meeting, he had recourse that day to every
sort of subtle device to prevent the law being passed. He even went so
far as to distribute to the voters only that tablet which they would
use in rejecting the law. When the heads of the Conservative party,
Cato, Hortensius, and Favonius, heard of this extraordinary intrigue,
they hurried to the _comitia_ and began to address the people. Cato
distinguished himself by a virulent attack on Piso. The speeches
were effectual in preventing the law from being put to the vote, and
therefore from being, as it assuredly would have been, rejected. They
could not, however, procure its approval, which, from Clodius’s point
of view, and for the moment at any rate, came to much the same thing.
Men’s passions began to get the better of them. The _amour propre_ of
the two small factions came more prominently into play the more the
case assumed a political aspect. Inasmuch as the opposition of one of
the two Consuls who had proposed the law was the greatest impediment
to the approval of the law, means must be found for getting rid of
Piso. The Pietists thought of exerting pressure upon him by means of
the Senate. They summoned a meeting of the Senate on urgent business,
and proposed a motion inviting the Consuls once more to join in
recommending the law to the popular vote; in other words, intimating to
Piso that he had better abandon his attitude of obstruction. A lively
discussion ensued. The friends of Clodius opposed the motion with
great energy; but it was carried by four hundred votes to fifteen. A
truly crushing majority! Clodius’s act was so offensive to the public
that few Senators dared openly to side with him, even though they were
conscious that the law which was meant to bring him to book was fraught
with danger.
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