Tullius on the contrary took their votes only by centuries, the whole number of which amounted to one hundred and ninety-three, into which he had subdivided the six classes. But as the first class alone, which was composed wholly of the rich, contained ninety-eight of these centuries, if the centuries of the first class were unanimous, which, as Dionysius informs us, was generally the case, they carried every point by a sure majority of three.... If they disagreed, Tullius called the centuries of the second class, and so on until ninety-seven centuries agreed in one opinion, which made a majority of one. If the numbers continued equal, that is ninety-six on each side of the question, after the five first classes had voted; Tullius called up the sixth class which was composed wholly of the poorest people, and contained but one century, and the vote of this century determined the question.... But this case, as Dionysius observes, happened so very rarely; that even the votes of the fourth class were seldom called for, and thus the votes of the fifth and sixth were generally useless. Consequently when the people voted by their curiæ, where the vote of every individual was taken, the poor who were much the most numerous, might always be secure of a great majority.... But when the votes were taken by centuries, according to the new method instituted by Tullius, that numerous body of the poor, which composed the single century of the sixth class, and consequently had but one vote, became wholly insignificant. [244] Dionys. Halicarn. cap. 2. p. 137. Edit. Wechel. [245] About three hundred pounds. [246] Liv. lib. 4. p. 276. [248] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 4. p. 182. edit. 1546. [249] Dionys. Halicarn. id. ibid. [250] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 5. p. 205. [251] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 5. p. 247. [252] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 6. p. 255. [253] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 6. p. 266. [254] I have chiefly followed Livy in his beautiful relation of this affair, as the description he gives of this unhappy object, is not only much more striking than that of Dionysius, but one of the most pathetick I ever met with in history. Liv. lib. 2. p. 92. [255] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 61. p. 268. [256] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 6. p. 270. [257] Dionys. Halicarn. lib. 6. p. 276...77. [258] It is remarkable that Appius terms the aristocracy, which at that very time was hardly seventeen years standing, the form of government which they had inherited from their ancestors. [259] Liv. lib. 2. p. 91. [260] Sallust. Fragment. apud Augustin. de civitate Dei. lib. 2. cap. 18. edit. Froben. 1569.