[136]
Oh, but the whole senate judged that that tribunal had been bribed. How so? It undertook the
cause. Could it pass over with indifference a matter of that sort when reported to it? When a
tribune of the people, having stirred up the multitude, had almost brought the matter to a
trial of strength; when a most virtuous citizen and most innocent man was said to have been
unjustly condemned through the influence of money; when the whole body of senators was
exceedingly unpopular, was it possible for no edict to be issued? Was it possible for all that
excitement of the multitude to be disregarded without extreme danger to the republic? But what
was decreed? How justly, how wisely, how diligently was it decreed? “If there are
any men by whose agency the public court of justice was corrupted.” Does the senate
appear here to decide that any such thing was really done? or rather to be exceedingly angry
and indignant if such a thing was done? If Aulus Cluentius himself were asked his opinion
about the courts of justice he would express no other sentiments than those which they
expressed, by whose sentences you say that Aulus Cluentius was condemned.
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.