x. 9); but that technically it merely submitted the threat of such

_coercitio_ to appeal is shown by the fact that the law is classed amongst those regulating the _provocatio_ (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54).

[703] pp. 79, 109.

[704] Liv. x. 9 “cum eum qui provocasset virgis caedi securique necari vetuisset, si quis adversus ea fecisset, nihil ultra quam improbe factum adjecit.” The meaning of this sanction has been much disputed: it may mean “incapable of making a will,” on the analogy of “improbus (i.e. qui probare non potest) intestabilisque esto.” Mommsen (_Strafrecht_ p. 632) takes the expression to mean that the act of the magistrate would be regarded as “unjustified,” i.e. as an ordinary criminal offence.

[705] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54.

[706] p. 95.

[707] Dio Cass. liii. 17.

[708] Plin. _H.N._ vii 44; Liv. _Ep._ 59.

[709] Liv. ii 55; vii. 4.

[710] The _virgis caedi_ in the third _lex Valeria_ (note 2) probably refers to scourging as well as to death by the rod.

[711] Capito ap. Gell. iv. 10 “Caesar consul viatorem vocavit eumque (Catonem), cum finem non faceret (of speaking in the Senate) prendi loquentem et in carcerem duci jussit.” Cf. Suet. _Caes._ 17.

[712] The earliest recorded case is in Liv. _Ep._ xlviii. (Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 154). A typical instance belonging to the year 60 B.C. is described in Cic. _ad Att._ ii. 1, 8; Dio Cass. xxxvii. 50.

[713] It was thus that the imprisonment of M. Bibulus, consul in 59 (Cic. _in Vat._ 9, 21), and of M. Crassus, consul in 55 (Dio Cass. xxxix. 39), was prevented.

[714] The annals introduce bail as early as the trial of Kaeso Quinctius in 461 B.C. (Liv. iii. 13).

[715] Liv. xxv. 4 (212 B.C.).

[716] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. p. 143 n. 1) takes the view that the quaestor had no power of _coercitio_ through _multa_ and _pignus_. For an opposite opinion see Karlowa _Rechtsgesch._ i. p. 171 and Huschke _Multa_ p. 36.

[717] Dionys. x. 50 ἐπὶ τῆς λοχίτιδος ἐκκλησίας νόμον ἐκύρωσαν (the consuls Sp. Tarpeius and A. Aternius) ἵνα ταῖς ἀρχαῖς ἐξῇ πάσαις τοὺς ἀκοσμοῦντας ἤ παρανομοῦντας εἰς τὴν ἑαυτῶν ἐξουσίαν ζημιοῦν· τέως γὰρ οὐχ ἅπασιν ἐξῆν ἀλλὰ τοῖς ὑπάτοις μόνοις. Cf. Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 35, 60.

[718] Dionys. l.c.; Gell. xi. 1. Dionysius (probably by an error of the copyist) represents the fine as being two oxen or thirty sheep.

[719] Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 35, 60 “levis aestimatio pecudum in multa lege C. Julii, P. Papirii consulum constituta est”; Liv. iv. 30 “legem de multarum aestimatione pergratam populo ... ipsi (the consuls Julius and Papirius) praeoccupaverunt ferre”; Gell. xi. 1 “in oves singulas aeris deni, in boves aeris centeni ... Suprema multa est ejus numeri, ... ultra quem multam dicere in dies singulos jus non est.” Gellius, however, attributes the pecuniary estimate to the _lex Aternia_.

[720] The view has been sometimes held that the _multa suprema_ was one beyond which the magistrate could not under any circumstances go. In this case there is no known limit at which the appeal became possible. That there was one, however, is shown by the _provocatio ab omni judicio_ allowed by the Twelve Tables (Cic. _de Rep._ ii. 31, 54. See p. 106).

[721] p. 246.

[722] _Lex Tab. Bant._ 1. 12 “Sei quis mag(istratus) multam inrogare volet [_quei volet, dum minoris_] partus familias taxsat, liceto.”

[723] e.g. in case of continued resistance to the veto. See Liv. xliii. 16 (169 B.C., P. Rutilius) “Ti Gracchi primum bona consecravit, quod in multa pignoribusque ejus, qui tribunum adpellasset, intercessioni non parendo, se in ordinem coegisset”; or for a supposed stigma inflicted by a censor on a tribune (Plin. _H.N._ vii. 44). Cicero, _pro Domo_ 47, 123, mentions the consecration of the goods of L. Metellus by C. Atinius (131 B.C., Plin. l.c.) as an instance of “furor tribuni plebis, ductus ex nonnullis perveterum temporum exemplis.” P. Clodius (58 B.C.) consecrated the goods of Cicero and of Gabinius the consul (ib. § 124).

[724] _Lex Quinctia de aquaeductibus_ (Bruns _Fontes_) l. 20 “tum is praetor ... multa pignoribus cogito coerceto.”

[725] Cic. _de Orat._ iii. 1, 4, “pignora caedere” or “concidere”; the destruction was performed as an example “in conspectu populi Romani.”

[726] _Auct. de Vir. Illustr._ 72, 6. Cf. the procedure of the consul Servilius against the revolutionary praetor Caelius Rufus in 48 B.C. Dio Cass. xlii. 23 τόν τε δίφρον αὑτοῦ συνέτριψεν.

[727] Varro ap. Gell. xiii. 12 “vocationem (habent), ut consoles et caeteri, qui habent imperium; prensionem, ut tribuni plebis et alii, qui habent viatorem; neque vocationem neque prensionem, ut quaestores et ceteri, qui neque lictorem habent neque viatorem. Qui vocationem habent, idem prendere, tenere, abducere possunt.”

[728] p. 94.

[729] See Varro ap. Gell. l.c.

[730] Aediles were used in the trial of Coriolanus (Dionys. vii. 26, see p. 98); Gracchus sent one of his _viatores_ to drag his colleague Octavius from the Rostra (Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 12). Cf. Liv. xxv. 4 (case of Postumius 212 B.C.) “tribuni ... ni vades daret ... prehendi a viatore ... jusserunt.”

[731] Varro, as an antiquarian, refused to obey such a summons on the ground of its illegality (Gell. xiii. 12.)

[732] Donatus _ad Ter. Ad._ iv. 2, 9 “qui malam rem nuntiat, obnuntiat, qui bonam adnuntiat; nam proprie obnuntiare dicuntur augures, qui aliquid mali ominis scaevumque viderint.” Cf. Cicero _Phil._ ii. 33, 83; _de Div._ i. 16, 29 (_dirarum obnuntiatio_).

[733] The plebeian magistrates sometimes watched for such signs, for purposes of obstruction, and were then improperly said _servare de coelo_ (Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 3, 3). The words are properly used only of the _spectio_. See Greenidge, “The Repeal of the Lex Aelia Fufia” in _Class. Rev._ vii. p. 158.

[734] p. 163.

[735] Cic. _pro Sest._ 36, 78; Dio Cass. xxxviii. 13. To discuss, as has been done, whether the patrician magistrates’ _obnuntiatio_ was valid against the tribunes is to raise rather an idle question. The _lex Aelia Fufia_ could not have artificially regulated religious belief, and the Plebs was as susceptible to _auspicia_ as the Populus (see p. 39).

[736] Gell. xiii. 15; _minor_ here simply means “inferior to the consul.”

[737] They regulated the precedence of the _comitia_ for elections and for laws (Cic. _ad Att._ i. 16, 13).

[738] Cic. _in Pis._ 4, 9; _de Prov. Con._ 19, 46; _in Vat._ 7, 18.

[739] Cic. _Phil._ ii. 32, 80 and 38, 99; _ad Att._ iv. 9, 1; 16, 7, etc. See _Class. Rev._ vii. p. 160.

[740] The exercise of the _coercitio_ might of course be vetoed, and in this case the prohibition was of no avail. See Liv. ix. 34 (n. 7).

[741] p. 159.

[742] Liv. xliii. 16 (169 B.C., P. Rutilius tr. pl.) “C. Claudio diem dixit, quod contionem ab se avocasset.”

[743] ib. xxvii. 5 (210 B.C.). The consul declined to question the people on the nomination of a dictator, “quod suae potestatis esset,” and forbade the praetor to do so.

[744] p. 172.

[745] Cf. the story in Suet. _Tib._ 2, “Etiam virgo vestalis fratrem (App. Claudius, consul 143 B.C.) injussu populi triumphantem, adscenso simul curru, usque in Capitolium prosecuta est, ne vetare aut intercedere fas cuiquam tribunorum esset.”

[746] Liv. ix. 33-34. P. Sempronius, tribune, attempted to compel App. Claudius, who was trying to prolong his censorship beyond eighteen months, to abdicate. He tried to imprison the censor but was resisted by the veto of three colleagues.

[747] _Auct. de vir. illustr._ 72, 6 (for the occasion see p. 171); the consul “ne quis ad eum (praetorem) in jus ire edixit.” Dio Cass. xlii. 23; amongst the other penalties imposed by Servilius Isauricus on Caelius Rufus (see p. 171) was the transference of his functions to another praetor, τά τε προσήκοντα τῇ ἀρχῇ αὐτοῦ ἄλλῳ τῳ τῶν στρατηγῶν προσέταξε.

[748] Cic. _in Verr._ iii. 58, 134 “quaestores, legates, praefectos, tribunos suos, multi missos fecerunt et de provincia decedere jusserunt, quod illorum culpa se minus commode audire arbitrarentur, aut quod peccare ipsos aliqua in re judicarent.”

[749] Liv. iii. 27; vii. 9.

[750] _C.I.L._ vi. n. 895.

[751] Liv. iii. 3; Cic. _Phil._ v. 12, 31.

[752] Liv. iii. 5; vi. 7; Cic. l.c.

[753] Mommsen conjectures that, on the occasion of every public funeral in the forum, a short _justitium_ was declared (_Staatsr._ i. p. 251 n. 4).

[754] Liv. x. 21.

[755] Cic. _de Har. Resp._ 26, 55 “justitium edici oportere, jurisdictionem intermitti, claudi aerarium, judicia tolli.” Cf. Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10; Cic. _pro Plancio_ 14, 33.

[756] Liv. vi 7.

[757] Cic. _Brut._ 89, 304 “exercebatur una lege judicium Varia, ceteris propter bellum intermissis.”

[758] p. 119.

[759] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10.

[760] “(Feriae) imperativae sunt, quas consules vel praetores pro arbitrio potestatis indicunt” (Macrob. _Saturn._ i. 16, 6).

[761] e.g. by Livy (x. 37).

[762] No instance of such a veto being exercised at Rome is known; but it is recognised in the municipal law of Salpensa (Bruns _Fontes_) c. 27.

[763] Or _decretum_. The formal difference is slight; by the end of the Republic _edictum_ is a general, _decretum_ a more special (and generally judicial) command.

[764] Liv. iv. 55.

[765] Caes. _Bell. Civ._ iii. 20 (Caelius Rufus) “tribunal suum juxta C. Treboni praetoris urbani sellam collocavit, et si quis appellavisset ... fore auxilio pollicebatur.” For the consequent necessity of the presence of the tribunes in Rome see p. 94.

[766] Thus Verres, who was _praetor urbanus_, had his decisions vetoed by Piso, who was probably _praetor peregrinus_, in cases where Verres had decided contrary to his own edict. Cic. _in Verr._ i. 46, 119; cf. Caes. l.c.

[767] Of the four private-law speeches of Cicero, two, those for Quinctius and Tullius, show the request for tribunician interference with the praetor’s jurisdiction. Cf. Cic. _Acad. Prior._ ii. 30, 97 “postulant ut excipiantur haec inexplicabilia. Tribunum aliquem censeo adeant (_al._ videant); a me istam exceptionem nunquam impetrabunt.”

[768] Liv. xxxiii. 42.

[769] The tribunes promise “cognituros se de quo appellati essent” (Liv. xlii. 32).

[770] Liv. xlii. 33.

[771] Ascon. _in Milon._ p. 47.

[772] p. 174.

[773] Liv. iv. 50; xxv. 2.

[774] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 12, 30.

[775] Plut. _Ti. Gracch._ 10.

[776] Cic. _ad Att._ iv. 16, 6; Ascon. _in Cornel._ p. 58.

[777] Liv. xlv. 21 “cum ita traditum esset, ne quis prius intercedat legi, quam privatis suadendi dissuadendique legem potestas facta esset.”

[778] Momms. _Staatsr._ i p. 285.

[779] Liv. xxvii. 6.

[780] Cic. _pro Sest._ 31, 68.

[781] ib. 34, 74.

[782] Cic. _ad Fam._ x. 12, 3 and 4.

[783] Liv. xxx. 43. Consular intercession against the praetor was unnecessary, since the praetor did not usually summon the Senate while the consul was at Rome.

[784] Val. Max. ii. 2, 7 “Illud quoque memoria repetendum est, quod tribunis plebis intrare curiam non licebat, ante valvas autem positis subselliis decreta patrum attentissima cura examinabant, ut, si qua ex eis improbassent, rata esse non sinerent. Itaque veteribus senatus consultis C. litera subscribi solebat, eaque nota significabatur illa tribunos quoque censuisse.” In _S.C.C._ translated into Greek it appears as ἔδοξεν (_S.C.C. de Thisbaeis_, Bruns _Fontes_). In those given in Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 8, 6, the letters “i. n.” (sometimes interpreted “intercessit nemo”) are probably a corruption for _censuere_.

[785] Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 282 n. 7; combated by Willems _Le Sénat_ p. 200 n. 2.

[786] Liv. xxvi. 26; xxx. 40; cf. xlii. 10 “Popillius ... prae se ferens si quid decernerent, intercessurum, collegam deterruit.”

[787] Val. Max. ii. 2, 7.

[788] Cic. _ad Fam._ x. 12, 3.

[789] Liv. xxxvi. 40.

[790] Cic. _ad Fam._ viii. 8, 6 “qui impedierit prohibuerit, eum senatum existimare contra rem publicam fecisse.”

[791] Cic. _de Prov. Con._ 8, 17; _pro Domo_ 9, 24. Intercession in jurisdiction and administration is sometimes forbidden in municipal laws: _Lex Rubria_ i. 50; _Lex Ursonensis_ c. 72 (Bruns _Fontes_).

[792] Varro ap. Gell. xiii. 13 “Qui potestatem neque vocationis populi viritim habent neque prensionis, eos magistratus a privato in jus quoque vocari est potestas.” The context shows that they were practically as exempt as the higher magistrates.

[793] Nothing is known of the early history of _peculatus_. The word itself, “the misappropriation of cattle,” which had been collected as fines, shows the antiquity of the offence described by Varro (_L.L._ v. 95) as _peculatus publicus_. For the early procedure see Mommsen _Strafrecht_ p. 768.

[794] In Polybius’ time bribery was a capital offence at Rome (Polyb. vi 56).

[795] Polyb. vi. 14. The people are often judges of money penalties, when the offence can be valued in money, καὶ μάλιστα τοὺς τὰς ἐπιφανεῖς ἐσχηκότας ἀρχάς, θανάτου δὲ κρίνει μόνος. Cf. c. 15. The greatest source of the power of the people is that ἀποτιθεμένους τὴν ἀρχὴν ἐν τούτῳ δεῖ τὰς εὐθύνας ὑπέχειν τῶν πεπραγμένων.

[796] Liv. xxiv. 43 (214 B.C., the tribune Metellus prosecutes the censors Furius and Atilius) “Sed novem tribunorum auxilio vetiti causam in magistratu dicere dimissique fuerant”; Suet. _Caes._ 23 (Caesar on leaving for Gaul) “a L. Antistio, tr. pl., postulatus, appellato demum collegio, obtinuit, cum reipublicae causa abesset, reus ne fieret.” In the case of the trial of the censors of 169 B.C. (Liv. xliii 16) the accused agree to be put on their trial during their tenure of office.

[797] Liv. xxix. 22 (204 B.C.). Pleminius and his colleagues were “producti ad populum ab tribunis.”

[798] ib. vi. 1 “Q. Fabio ... ab Cn. Marcio tribuno plebis dicta dies est, quod legatus in Gallos, ad quos missus erat orator, contra jus gentium pugnasset.”

[799] ib. _Ep._ 69 “L. Appuleius Saturninus ... Metello Numidico, eo quod in eam (the agrarian law) non juraverat, diem dixit.”

[800] ib. xxv. 3 (Postumius a _publicanus_, for shipwrecking and false reports of shipwreck).

[801] e.g. waging war without authorisation (Ascon. _in Cornelian_. p. 80, 104 B.C.), disgraceful flight imperilling the safety of others (Liv. xxvi. 2, 211 B.C.).

[802] Exceeding the legal duration of a magistracy, in this case the dictatorship (Cic. _de Off._ iii. 31, 112). The instance, though typical, is not historic.

[803] Liv. xliii. 7, 8 (170 B.C.).

[804] Tac. _Ann._ xi. 22 “apud majores ... cunctis civium, si bonis artibus fiderent, licitum petere magistratus.”

[805] Festus p. 231 “plebeium magistratum neminem capere licet, nisi qui ex plebe est.” Cf. Suet. _Aug._ 10.

[806] This seems shown by Suet. _Claud._ 24 (see p. 135).

[807] Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 488. Exceptional elections of the sons of freedmen are found in 304 B.C. (Liv. ix. 46, Cn. Flavius (see p. 185) as aedile) and in the year 100 B.C. (App. B.C. i. 33).

[808] _Lex Julia Municipalis_ (Bruns _Fontes_) l. 92 “in castreis inve provincia.”

[809] Plut. _C. Gracch._ 2.

[810] There is also evidence for this as the minimum age at a period earlier than Cicero’s political career; see Cic. _in Verr._ ii. 49, 122.

[811] In Caesar’s municipal law (45 B.C.) the qualification for a municipal magistracy is either thirty years of age or a certain length of service—six years on foot or three on horseback (_L.J.M._ l. 89).

[812] Liv. ix. 46 (of the election of Cn. Flavius to the curule aedileship) “Invenio in quibusdam annalibus, cum adpareret aedilibus ... neque accipi nomen, quia scriptum faceret, tabulam posuisse et jurasse, se scriptum non facturum.”

[813] Cic. _de Off._ i. 42, 150; in later Roman law spoken of as _vilitas_; see Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ pp. 12, 193.

[814] Cic. _pro Cluent._ 42, 119; Schol. Bob. in Cic. _pro Sulla_ 5, 17, p. 361 Orell.; Cic. _pro Rosc. Com._ 6, 16; Tertull. _de Spect._ 22; Ascon. _in orat. in Tog. Cand._ p. 115; _Lex Julia Munic._ l. 104; _Dig._ 48, 7, 1. All these passages are discussed in Greenidge _Infamia in Roman Law_ pp. 18-40 and 187.

[815] Liv. iii. 35 “Ars haec erat, ne semet ipse creare posset; quod praeter tribunos plebi (et id ipsum pessimo exemplo) nemo unquam fecisset.” The revolutionary period shows Cinna and Carbo nominating themselves consuls for two successive years (Liv. _Ep._ 83) and Caesar as dictator presiding over his own election to the consulship (Caes. B.C. iii. 1, 1).

[816] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 8, 21 “Licinia est lex atque altera Aebutia, quae non modo eum, qui tulerit de aliqua curatione ac potestate, sed etiam collegas ejus, cognatos, affines excipit, ne eis ea potestas curatiove mandetur.”

[817] Liv. vii. 42 “aliis plebiscitis cautum ne quis eundem magistratum intra decem annos caperet; neu duos magistratus uno anno gereret.” Cf. x. 13.

[818] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 9, 24 “ne in iis quidem magistratibus quorum certus ordo est.”

[819] Liv. xl. 44 “eo anno rogatio primum lata est ab L. Villio tr. pl., quot annos nati quemque magistratum peterent caperentque.” It probably accepted the age of twenty-eight for the quaestorship; the minimum age for the consulship in the time of Cicero was forty-three (_Phil._ v. 17, 48); that for the praetorship is quite unknown; thirty-five and forty have been conjectured.

[820] Cic. _ad Fam._ x. 25, 2 “non est annus hic tibi destinatus, ut, si aedilis fuisses, post biennium tuus annus esset” (i.e. for election to the praetorship). To be elected in the earliest year, when one is qualified by the interval, is to attain a magistracy “anno sibi destinato” (l.c.) or “suo anno” (Cic. _pro Mil._ 9, 24). Momms. _Staatsr._ i. pp. 527, 529. The principle of at least one year’s interval seems to have applied to the transition from plebeian to patrician magistracies in the form that candidature during the holding of any office was forbidden (Momms. _Staatsr._ i. p. 533).

[821] App. B.C. i. 100 καὶ στρατηγεῖν ἀπεῖπε πρὶν ταμιεῦσαι καὶ ὑπατεύειν πρὶν στρατηγῆσαι, καὶ τὴν ἀρχὴν τὴν αὐτὴν αὖθις ἄρχειν ἐκώλυσε πρὶν ἒτη δέκα διαγενέσθαι.

[822] Cic. _ad Fam._ xvi. 12, 3 “se praesentem trinum nundinum petiturum”; Sallust, _Cat._ 18 “post paulo Catilina pecuniarum repetundarum reus prohibitus erat consulatum petere, quod intra legitimos dies profiteri nequiverit.” The interval was probably twenty-four days. See the section on the _comitia_.

[823] Plut. _Aem. Paul._ 3; _Sull._ 5.

[824] Cic. _de Leg. Agr._ ii. 9, 24 (63 B.C.) “praesentem profiteri jubet, quod nulla alia in lege unquam fuit, ne in iis quidem magistratibus quorum certus ordo est”; Suet. _Caes._ 18 (60 B.C.) “cum edictis jam comitiis ratio ejus haberi non posset ... et ambienti ut legibus solveretur multi contradicerent, coactus est triumphum, ne consulatu excluderetur, dimittere.” Cf. Plut. _Caes._ 13.

[825] Dio Cass. xl. 56 (Pompeius) τὸν περὶ τῶν ἀρχαιρεσιῶν νόμον τὸν κελεύοντα τοὺς ἀρχήν τινα ἐπαγγέλλοντας ἐς τὴν ἐκκλησίαν πάντως ἁπαντᾷν, ὥστε μηδένα ἀπόντα αἱρεῖσθαι, παρημελημένον πῶς ἀνενεώσατο.

[826] Hence their association with _sequestres_—the agents in whose hands the candidate deposited money. Cic. _pro Planc._ 18, 19; Q. Cic. _de Pet. Cons._ 14, 57.

[827] _Lex Jul. Munic._ l. 132 “neve quis ejus rationem comitieis conciliove [habeto, neive quis quem, sei adversus ea comitieis conciliove] creatum est, renuntiato.” In 67 B.C. the consul Piso, questioned “Palicanum num suffragiis populi consulem creatum renuntiaturus esset,” answered “non renuntiabo” (Val. Max. iii. 8, 3).

[828] p. 47.

[829] Mommsen (_Staatsr._ i. p. 599) places this change in 222 B.C. Liv. xxxi. 5, etc.

[830] _Fasti Praenestini_ (_C.I.L._ i. p. 364) “[ann]us nov[us incipit], quia eo die mag[istratus] ineunt: quod coepit [p. R.] c. a. DCI.”

[831] Quaestors (Cic. _in Verr._ Act. i. 10, 30; _Lex de XX. quaest._ in Bruns _Fontes_ l. 15); tribunes (Dionys. vi 89).

[832] Dio Cass. xl. 66; Cic. _in Verr._ i. 41, 105; Liv. xxi. 63.

[833] The _execratio_ is given by Pliny (_Paneg._ 64), “explanavit verba quibus caput suum, domum suam, si sciens fefellisset, deorum (Jupiter and the Dii Penates) irae consecraret.”

[834] Cic. _ad Att._ ii. 18, 2 “habet ... Campana Lex (of the consul Caesar in 59 B.C.) execrationem in contione candidatorum.”

[835] Liv. xxxi. 50; if we may argue from municipal law (_Lex Salpens._