Salve Venetia, gleanings from Venetian history; vol. IICrawford, F. Marion (Francis Marion)
History
Salve Venetia, gleanings from Venetian history; vol. II
Crawford, F. Marion (Francis Marion)
Venice (Italy) -- History
At the same time Renier Zeno was arbitrarily forbidden, contrary to all
law, to call into question the conduct of the courts in general, but he
was too proud and energetic to submit to such despotism, and what it
pleased the Council of Ten to call his ‘pride’ served his adversaries as
a pretext for accusing him. The Council had the imprudence to condemn
him to ten years’ imprisonment in the fortress of Cattaro; but this was
too much, and the Ten were soon forced to revoke the sentence as
completely as they had annulled that of the unfortunate Foscarini. But
the world saw, and the prestige of the Council was gone; the government
cast about in vain for some means of restoring it, and could find
nothing to do except to make a few reforms and changes in its old system
of spying and repression.
Ever since the fourteenth century there had been a locked box with a
slit in it, placed in a public part of the ducal palace, into which any
one might drop an anonymous written accusation against any one else,
from the Doge down. Little by little the use of this means of
‘informing’ developed, until it had now become common to try cases on
the mere strength of such unsupported accusations. The boxes were
called the Lions’ Mouths on account of the shape they had taken, and
there was much talk about them when it was attempted to reform the Code
of Laws in the seventeenth century. A decree of the year 1635 restored
the old regulations as to the nature of the misdeeds which might be thus
denounced.
[Illustration: THE FONDAMENTA S. GIORGIO, REDENTORE IN DISTANCE]
It was decided that if the accusation was signed, four-fifths of the
judges must agree before the case could be brought to trial; if the
information was anonymous there could be no trial without the consent of
the Doge, his counsellors, and the chiefs of the Ten to bring the case
before the Great Council, and the trial could not be opened unless it
were voted necessary by five-sixths of the assembly. These measures
were no doubt prudent, but it was the system itself that was at fault;
any Venetian was authorised by it to take upon himself the duties of a
detective, and was encouraged to spy on his neighbours, because the
courts generally rewarded the informer after a conviction.
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