3. In Gaul, the prætor, Marcus Furius, seeking a pretext for war in the midst of peace, deprived, the unoffending Cænomanians of their arms. The Cænomanians complained of this to the senate at Rome, and were by them referred to the consul Æmilius, whom the senate authorized to examine into and determine the cause; after a warm contest with the prætor they gained their cause. The prætor was ordered to restore their arms to the Cænomanians, and quit the province. The senate afterwards gave audience to envoys of the Latin confederation, who had come, in great numbers, from all parts of Latium. On their complaint that a great multitude of their citizens had been removed to Rome, and had been assessed there in the survey; a commission was given to Quintus Terentius Culleo, the prætor, to make inquiry after such persons; and on the allies proving that those persons themselves, or their fathers, had been assessed in the surveys of their states in the censorship of Caius Claudius and Marcus Livius, or at some time subsequent to their censorship, he was ordered to compel all such to return to the several states wherein they had been so rated. In consequence of this inquiry, twelve thousand Latins returned home; as the multitude of foreigners even then burdened the city. 4. Before the consuls came home to Rome, Marcus Fulvius, the proconsul, returned from Ætolia. He, when he had as usual recited to the senate, in the temple of Apollo, the services which he had performed in Ætolia and Cephallenia, then requested of the fathers, that, in consideration of his having conducted the business of the public with good fortune and success, they would think proper to order public thanks to be offered to the immortal gods, and to decree a triumph to him. Marcus Abutius, a tribune of the commons, gave notice, that, if any thing were determined on that subject before the arrival of Marcus Æmilius, he would enter his protest: for “the consul intended to oppose that measure; and, at his setting out for his province, had given him a charge to keep the discussion of it open until he should come home. That Fulvius would suffer a loss of nothing but time; for, notwithstanding the presence of the consul, the senate would determine according to their own wishes.” Fulvius replied, that, “even if the quarrel subsisting between him and Marcus Æmilius was unknown to the world, or with what overbearing, and, in some measure, tyrannical rancour, that man prosecuted his enmity; yet it was insufferable, that the absence of the consul should both obstruct the worship of the immortal gods, and delay a triumph merited and due; that a commander, after performing signal services, and his victorious army with its booty and prisoners, should remain outside the gates, until a consul, who purposely delayed abroad, should be pleased to return to Rome. But, in the present case, when the animosity between him and the consul was most notorious, what fair dealing could any one