After them, Lucius Caelius not only stated that Aebutius was there with a large force of
 armed men, but also that Caecina had come thither with a very limited train. 
 Shall I at all disparage this witness? I beg you to believe him as much as you believe my
 witnesses. Publius Memmius followed; who mentioned his having done a great kindness to the
 friends of Caecina, in giving them a passage through his brother's farm, by which they could
 escape, when they were all in a state of great alarm and consternation. I will here give my
 public thanks to this witness for having shown himself merciful in his conduct, and
 conscientious in giving his evidence. Aulus Atilius and his
 son Lucius Atilius stated that there were armed men there, and that they also brought their
 slaves armed. They said this also; that when Aebutius was threatening Caecina, Caecina then and
 there required of him to let his ejection be accomplished in the regular form. Publius Rutilius
 stated the same thing, and he stated it the more willingly, in order to have credit attached to
 his evidence in a court of justice. Besides these, two more witnesses gave evidence, saying
 nothing about the violence, but speaking only of the original business and of the purchase of
 the farm. There was Publius Caesennius, the seller of the farm, a man with a body of greater
 weight than his character; and Sextus Clodius, a banker, whose surname is Phormio, a man no less
 black and no less presuming than that Phormio in Terence: neither of these said anything about
 violence, nor about anything else which had any reference to this trial. But the tenth witness, the one who had been reserved for the last, a senator
 of the Roman people, the pride of his order, the flower and ornament of the courts of justice
 the model of ancient piety, Fidiculanius Falcula; gave his evidence also. But though he came
 forward so eagerly and violently that he not only attacked Caecina with his perjuries, but
 seemed to be angry with me also, I made him so tranquil and gentle that he did not dare, as you
 recollect, to say a second time even how many miles his farm was distant from the city. For when
 he had said that it was fifty-three miles Some think that the number of
 miles here ought to be forty. In the trial of Cluentius, Cicero imputes to all the judges that
 they had been bribed with forty thousand sesterces; and of
 these judges Falcula was one, so that the laughter of the people must have been excited by a
 similarity of number between the sesterces and the miles. off, the people cried out with
 a laugh, that that was exactly the distance. For all men recollected how much he had received on
 the trial of Albius. What shall I say against him except that
 which he cannot deny?—that he came on the bench during a criminal trial, though he was not a
 member of that tribunal; and that, while sitting on that bench, though he had not heard a word
 of the cause, and though there was an opportunity of adjourning the decision, he still gave his
 sentence, “ that the case was proved;” that as he chose to decide without having inquired into
 the matter, he preferred condemning to acquitting; and that, inasmuch as, if there had been one
 damnatory vote fewer, the defendant could not have been condemned, he came forward, not so much
 for the purpose of investigating the case, as of insuring a conviction. Can anything worse be
 said against any man, than that he was induced by a bribe to condemn a man whom he had never
 seen nor even heard of? Or, can any allegation be made against a man on more certain grounds
 than one which even he, against whom it is made, cannot attempt to invalidate, not even by
 signs? However that witness, (in order that you might easily
 understand that he was not present in mind while their case was being stated by that party, and
 while their witnesses were giving their evidence, but that he was thinking of some criminal,)
 though every witness before him had stated that there were many armed men with Aebutius, said,
 (though he stood alone in his statement,) that there were no armed men at all. At first, I
 thought that the cunning fellow was well aware of what the cause was in need of, and only made a
 mistake because he was contradicting all the witnesses who had spoken before him; when all of a
 sudden, according to his usual custom, he forgets his previous statement, and says that his
 slaves were the only armed men there. 
 What can you do with such a man as this? Must you not grant to him sometimes to escape from
 the odium due to his excessive wickedness by the excuse of his prodigious stupidity?