The Council of Seventy then appointed two committees of its own members. The first, commonly called from its number the _Otto di pratica_, took the place of the Magistracy of Ten. It sat only in time of war, and assumed the control of political and military affairs, which, after deliberation in full session, it submitted to the Seventy. The other committee, consisting of twelve members, was entrusted with all affairs concerning the national credit, and all matters of jurisdiction. Both were nominated for a period of six months, and any vacancies caused by death or an appointment to offices abroad were to be filled up from the same college.[227] The existing magistracy, called the _Otto di balia_, whose authority in both civil and criminal affairs had almost extinguished that of the podestà but had lately been reduced within narrower limits, was likewise chosen from among the Seventy. However widely the opinions of contemporaries and posterity may differ as to the character and scope of these institutions, which were afterwards greatly modified in the direction of centralisation, all agree that the measures just described contributed most effectively to the establishment of personal government. ‘One must perceive,’ observes Alamanno Rinuccini on the first resolution, ‘that all freedom was taken from the people and they were made the servants of the Thirty, as I, Alamanno Rinuccini, though a member of the Council of the Two Hundred and Ten, testify in accordance with truth.’ And further, on the completion of the scheme: ‘The decree contained many things dishonourable and opposed to citizen-life and to the freedom of the people; and, indeed, from that day their freedom seemed to me dead and buried.’ The general opinion on the connection of the administration with the financial affairs of the Medici is shown by the remarks of both friends and foes. Giovanni Cambi remarks: ‘Lorenzo was always thinking how he could increase his authority. After the new reform had conferred on the electors a power formerly belonging to the whole body of citizens, the former took into their own hands the money matters that needed regulating. The state finances had been used to support Lorenzo in his private affairs. More than a hundred thousand gold florins went to Bruges alone, where Tommaso Portinari was at the head of the Medici bank, then in danger of failure. The unfortunate community had to pay it all, for the members of the new elective body cared for nothing but to keep their own position, and assented to everything. Thus a servile feeling gained ground; the citizens sacrificed their freedom to obtain office. Yet what they did obtain was not enough to satisfy them; for all looked enviously on the inner council, to which each thought himself worthy to belong.’ The voice that carries most weight is perhaps that of Alessandro de’ Pazzi, who gives a sketch of his uncle in his disquisition on the Florentine constitution of 1522.