[57]
Some one will say, “What fault
then do you find with Verres in this, who not only is not a thief himself, but who
did not even allow any one else to be one?” Listen a moment. Now you shall
see that this money which was just now seen to leave his house by the main road
returned back again by a by-path. What came next? Ought not the praetor, having
inquired into the case with the bench of judges, when he had found out that a
companion of his own, with the object of corruptly swaying the law, the sentence,
and the bench, (a matter in which the reputation of the praetor and even his
condition as a free citizen were at stake,) had received money, and that the men of
Bidis had given it, doing injury to the fair fame and fortune of the
praetor,—ought he not, I say, to have punished both him who had taken the
money, and those who had given it? You who had determined to punish those who had
given an erroneous decision, which is often done out of ignorance, do you permit men
to escape with impunity who thought that money might be received or be paid for the
purpose of influencing your decree, your judicial decision? And yet that same
Volcatius remained with you, although he was a Roman knight, after he had such
disgrace put upon him.
This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.