The object of the constitution, which was based upon property, would have been quite defeated, if the first class had not possessed a preponderance of votes. The centuries in the lower classes were strong in numbers in an inverse ratio to their fortunes: out of thirty-five citizens who were able to vote, six only belonged to the first class. Dionysius does not see his way through all the details; yet he plainly states that it was according to property that the whole of the calculations were made. All those who had property, the assessed value of which amounted to less than 12,500 asses, were moreover divided into such as still belonged to the _locupletes_, which was the case if their rateable property was worth more than fifteen hundred asses; and into those who had even less. The latter were called _proletarii_, which means persons who paid no tax: they formed a century. The _locupletes_ comprehended all the plebeians but the proletarians, and so far they were all equal; yet there was a gulf between them and the proletarians. Any _locuples_, for instance, could in a court of law become personal security for another; the proletarian could not. With money, of course, he only could be _vindex_, who was able to prove from the censor’s books that he had the requisite property; and certainly _locupletes_ alone could be appointed as judges by the prætor, and appear as witnesses, which is shown by the term _locupletes testes_. The proletarians, therefore, were placed in quite a different category. Whether at that time they may not also have been debarred from voting in the plebeian tribes, is uncertain.