Immagini della pagina
PDF
ePub

invidiam vero his temporibus habere consulatus ipse nullam potest; obicitur enim contionibus seditiosorum, 30 insidiis coniuratorum, telis Catilinae, ad omne denique periculum atque ad omnem iniuriam solus opponitur. 88 Quare quid invidendum Murenae aut cuiquam nostrum sit in hoc praeclaro consulatu, non video, iudices; quae vero miseranda sunt, ea et mihi ante oculos versantur et vos videre et perspicere potestis. XLI. Si, quod Iuppiter omen avertat! hunc vestris sententiis adflixeritis, quo se miser vertet? domumne? ut eam imaginem clarissimi viri, parentis sui, quam paucis ante 5 diebus laureatam in sua gratulatione conspexit, eandem deformatam ignominia lugentemque videat? An ad matrem, quae misera modo consulem osculata filium suum nunc cruciatur et sollicita est, ne eundem paulo post spoliatum omni dignitate conspiciat? Sed quid 10 ego matrem eius aut domum appello, quem nova poena legis et domo et parente et omnium suorum consuetudine conspectuque privat? Ibit igitur in exilium miser? Quo? ad orientisne partis, in quibus annos multos legatus fuit, exercitus duxit, res maximas gessit? At 15 habet magnum dolorem, unde cum honore decesseris, eodem cum ignominia reverti. An se in contrariam

§ 88. 33. praeclaro: see on imaginum into the family, and the § 22. 4. masks in Murena's hall could not therefore be very numerous. 1, 2. quod omen, 'an omen laureatam, I wreathed with which: the ominous word is laurel,' an honor conferred upon adflixeritis to which omen is in those who had celebrated a apposition; for its position in the triumph: see §§ 11, ad fin, and relative clause, A. 201 d; G. 618; 15. 13. H. 445 9; B. 251 4 b).

[ocr errors]

3-5. imaginem. For the ius imaginum, see on p. 55, §§ 12. 13.

§ 89. 10. nova poena: see on § 8. 2 ad fin.

16, 17. in contrariam partem

Murena's great-grandfather (see abdet: for the acc. where we on Title) had brought the ius should expect the abl. of place cf.

partem terrarum abdet, ut Gallia Transalpina, quem nuper summo cum imperio libentissime viderit, eundem lugentem, maerentem, exulem videat? In ea porro provincia quo animo C. Murenam fratrem suum aspiciet? 20 Qui huius dolor, qui illius maeror erit, quae utriusque lamentatio, quanta autem perturbatio fortunae atque sermonis, cum, quibus in locis paucis ante diebus factum esse consulem Murenam nuntii litteraeque celebrarint et unde hospites atque amici gratulatum Romam 25 concurrerint, repente existet ipse nuntius suae calamitatis! Quae si acerba, si misera, si luctuosa sunt, 90 si alienissima a mansuetudine et misericordia vestra, iudices, conservate populi Romani beneficium, reddite rei publicae consulem, date hoc ipsius pudori, date 30 patri mortuo, date generi et familiae, date etiam Lanuvio, municipio honestissimo, quod in hac tota causa frequens maestumque vidistis. Nolite a sacris patriis Iunonis Sospitae, cui omnes consules facere necesse est, domesticum et suum consulem potissimum avellere. 35

Caes. I. 12. 3. Gallia Transal- ferer, e.g., by the gloom on his pina: see on Title, ad fin. Cicero countenance. elsewhere writes G. ulterior or Gallia alone.

24-26. celebrarint, 'spread far and wide.' nuntius, in apposition with ipse: translate as suggested on § 7. 30.

§ 90. 29. beneficium: for meaning cf. § 86. 11.

18, 20. summo cum imperio, as propraetor: see § 42. 19 f. The phrase with cum is equivalent to a participle (praeditum) with the abl. (see on I. 15. 25), and is therefore strictly parallel with lugentem, 1. 19. C. Murenam had been left in Gaul as legatus by his brother brought thence to Rome in 338, when the latter returned to Rome and ranked among the most imin 63 to conduct his canvass.

34. Iunonis Sospitae: the worship of Juno as the 'Deliverer' originated at Lanuvium, and was

portant in the city. cui facere: 21. dolor, maeror. Syn- sc. sacra, from 1. 33, though faonyms: dolor is grief as felt in cere is sometimes used absolutely the heart, maeror as expressed by rem divinam facere, sacrificare. the condition or action of the suf- omnes consules: the consuls

Quem ego vobis, si quid habet aut momenti commendatio aut auctoritatis confirmatio mea, consul consulem, iudices, ita commendo, ut cupidissimum otii, studiosissimum bonorum, acerrimum contra seditionem, for40 tissimum in bello, inimicissimum huic coniurationi, quae nunc rem publicam labefactat, futurum esse promittam et spondeam.

once a year made a formal and from Lanuvium, such an official official sacrifice to Juno Sospita, sacrifice in his consulship would who had two temples at Rome. be doubly grateful to the ancient 35. suum: as Murena came deity of that municipium.

§ 1.

EXCURSUS II.

ROMAN CRIMINAL TRIALS.

AT the conclusion of the speech for Murena, it may be well in preparation for those for Sulla, Milo, and Sestius, to give in connected form an outline of the procedure in the criminal courts in Cicero's time.

I. All criminal cases were tried by the standing courts (quaestiones perpetuae), as remodelled by Sulla. We know of six of these, de repetundis (misgovernment), de sicariis et veneficis (murder), de ambitu (illegal canvassing), de peculatu (embezzlement), de maiestate (treason), de falso (forgery), but there were probably others. § 2. Cases submitted to these courts were tried by a judge and jury. The official title of the judge was quaesitor; the jury as a body was termed consilium, while the individuals composing it were called iudices. Whenever, therefore, the plural iudices occurs in a phrase relating to a criminal trial it must be translated 'jurors' or 'jury,' never 'judges.'

§ 3.

II. The praetors, eight in number, were the Roman judges; but as two of these, the praetor urbanus and praetor peregrinus, were engaged with civil cases, six only were free to preside over the criminal courts, and to these six were assigned by lot the six courts men§ 4. tioned by name above. Over the remaining courts presided specially appointed officers (usually ex-aediles), who had the special title iudex

quaestionis as well as the general one quaesitor. The duty of the judge was merely that of a presiding officer. He was bound to see that the provisions of the law were strictly complied with, but was not allowed to direct or control the decision, which rested entirely with the iudices.

III. The jurors were Roman citizens living in the city itself, or in § 5. its immediate vicinity, and serving without pay. No one was eligible for jury duty who was invested with any of the higher offices of state, or who had ever been convicted of any offence affecting his standing as a citizen of full rights (civis optimo iure, p. 53, § 2). A list of men eligible for jury duty (album iudicum) was made up by the praetor urbanus at the beginning of his term, and was valid for the year. Of the jurors one-third had to be senators and two-thirds equestrians: § 6. of the latter class, one-half (i.e., one-third of the whole number) had to be tribuni aerarii, district presidents. Not much is known about these, but, as they were elected by the tribes, one-third of the jury was indirectly, at least, elective.

IV. A suit was begun by the accuser making application to the § 7. judge of the proper court for leave to bring the charge. As two or more persons might desire to prosecute the same man on the same charge, it was sometimes necessary for the judge to decide who should be the chief accuser (accusator), and who the supporters (subscriptores). When this had been determined by due inquiry (divinatio), the chief accuser made the formal charge (nomen detulit); and the judge, having first notified the accused (reus), and made sure that the accuser was a Roman citizen, duly registered the case (nomen recepit) upon his docket. He then fixed the day of trial, usually at an interval of ten days, and had the accused arrested and held for trial, or admitted him to bail.

v. On the day of trial the proper number (unknown to us) of § 8. jurors was chosen by lot from those not already engaged in other trials, but the accuser and accused had the privilege of challenging (reiectio) a certain number without assigning any cause. The remaining (consilium iudicum) were sworn, and the trial commenced. If it was not finished on the first day, the court adjourned to the next but one (perendie), and so on until the arguments of the counsel (altercatio) were finished, and the evidence was all in. The judge § 9. then called upon the jurors for their verdict, and apparently renewed their oaths. Each juror wrote his decision (sententia) secretly upon a tablet in one of three forms: A. (absolvo), 'not guilty;' C. (condemno), 'guilty;' or N. L. (non liquet), 'not proven.' The verdict was determined by a majority of votes, or, if there was a tie, the verdict was given in favor of the defendant. If the majority voted N. L., the case was tried again; otherwise, there was no appeal from the judgment of a quaestio.

§ 10.

VI. It will be noticed immediately that this procedure differs widely from ours. There was no professionally trained judge to sift the evidence, and sum it up for the jury. The quaesitores were changed from year to year, and the praetors at least were more apt to § 11. be skilful politicians than learned jurists. There was no class of professional advocates taking fees and living by their profession. Any citizen might accuse or defend any other, and, as a high reputation as a successful pleader helped a man to political distinction, many did So. Thus the relations of counsel to clients rested more than now $12. upon the grounds of personal feeling. Again it not infrequently happened that collusion existed between the accuser and the accused. The former frequently played into the hands of the latter by suppressing evidence, and conducting the case without energy (praevaricatio), and hence the chief security for an honest prosecution lay in § 13. the personal hostility of the two. Then no bounds were set to the matter of an advocate's speech. The time might be limited by the judge or by agreement, but the only measure of relevancy was the patience of the jury. It is safe to say that a modern judge would not allow half of any of Cicero's speeches to reach the ears of the jury. Lord Brougham declares that not one-sixth of the oration for Archias would be admissible in an English court. Great importance was therefore attached to an advocate's skill as an orator, and as much, perhaps, to his personal influence with the jury, and his posi§ 14. tion in the state. Other means, too, were employed to work upon the feelings of the jury. The accused was attended by crowds of friends; his wife, children, and parents surrounded him, and he and they wore old and filthy garments as a sign of mourning. Influential men were secured to testify in general terms to his character, memorials were presented from distant communities, and deputations were often § 15. present throughout the trial. Finally, bribery was too common to excite surprise, and was made all the easier because the jury was accessible to the agents of both parties instead of being kept apart as now. We may therefore conclude that while the Roman criminal law was administered more expeditiously than ours, it was not free from objectionable features.

« IndietroContinua »