The new year found Cicero still at Dyrrachium, waiting for the law to pass for his recall, which (owing chiefly to the riotous opposition of Clodius) did not pass till the 5th of August. We have no letters in the interval between January and August, but a few lively ones recounting the nature of his return (4th of September), and four speeches dealing with his position and that of his property. He seems at once to have attached himself to Pompey, and to have promoted his appointment as _præfectus annonæ_. TO ATTICUS (? IN EPIRUS[374]) DYRRACHIUM, JANUARY [Sidenote: B.C. 57, ÆT. 49] I have received a letter from my brother Quintus inclosing the decree of the senate passed concerning me. My intention is to await the time for legislation, and, if the law is defeated, I shall avail myself of the resolution of the senate,[375] and prefer to be deprived of my life rather than of my country. Make haste, I beg, to come to me. [Footnote 375: On 1st January, B.C. 57, P. Lentulus brought the case of Cicero before the senate. The prevailing opinion was that his _interdictio_ having been illegal, the senate could quash it. But Pompey, for the sake of security, recommended a _lex_. One of the tribunes, without actually vetoing the _senatus consultum_, demanded a night for consideration. The question was again debated in succeeding meetings of the senate, but on the 25th was not decided. Technically an _auctoritas_ was a decree that had been vetoed by a tribune, and Cicero (_pro Sest._ § 74) implies that such a veto had been put in, and at any rate the _noctis postulatio_ was equivalent to a veto.] LXXXVII (A III, 27) TO ATTICUS (? AT ROME) DYRRACHIUM (AFTER 25 JANUARY) [Sidenote: B.C. 57, ÆT. 49] From your letter and from the bare facts I see that I am utterly ruined.[376] I implore you, in view of my deplorable position, to stand by my family in whatever respect they shall need your help. I shall, as you say, see you soon. [Footnote 376: Perhaps he has just heard that the sitting of the senate on the 25th of January had been interrupted by Clodius's roughs. But other similar events happened, and there is no certain means of dating this note. The difficulty, as it stands, is that it implies Atticus's temporary return to Rome.] LXXXVIII (F V, 4) TO Q. METELLUS THE CONSUL (AT ROME) DYRRACHIUM (JANUARY) [Sidenote: B.C. 57, ÆT. 49]