Scaife ATLAS

For A. Cluentius (101-105)

urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi010.perseus-eng2:101-105

Refs	`{'start': {'reference': '101', 'human_reference': 'Section 101'}, 'end': {'reference': '105', 'human_reference': 'Section 105'}}`
Ancestors	`[]`
Children	`[]`

plain text • XML

This conciliation of good-will was laughed at, and so was this assumption of the character of a good man, as in the gilded statues which he erected in front of the temple of Juturna, at the bottom of which he had the following inscription engraved,—“that the kings had been restored by him to the favour of the people.” All his frauds and dishonest tricks were brought under discussion; his whole life, which has been spent in such a way as that, was laid open; his domestic poverty, the profits which he made in the courts of law, were all brought to light: an interpreter of peace and concord who regulated everything by the bribes which he received was not approved of. Therefore, Stalenus was condemned at that time, while he urged the same defence as Attius did.

When the Cominii did the same thing that I have done throughout the whole of this cause, people approved of them. Wherefore, if by the condemnation of Stalenus it was decided that Oppianicus had desired to corrupt the judges,—that Oppianicus had given one of the judges money to purchase the votes of the other judges, (since it has been already settled that either Cluentius is guilty of that offence, or else Oppianicus, but that no trace whatever is found of any money belonging to Cluentius having been ever given to any judge, while money belonging to Oppianicus was taken away, after the trial was over, from a judge,)—can it be doubtful that that conviction of Stalenus does not only not make against Cluentius, but is the greatest possible confirmation of our cause and of our defence?

Therefore, I see now that the case respecting the decision of Junius is of this nature, that I think it ought to be called an inroad of sedition, an instance of the violence of the multitude, an outrage on the part of a tribune, any thing rather than a judicial proceeding. But if any one calls that a regular trial, still he must inevitably admit this,—that that penalty which was sought to be recovered from Junius cannot by any means be connected with the cause of Cluentius. That decision of the tribunal over which Junius presided, was brought about by evidence. The cases of Bulbus, of Popillius, and of Gutta, do not make against Cluentius. That of Stalenus is actually in favour of Cluentius. Let us now see if there is any other decision which we can produce which is favourable to Cluentius.

Was not Caius Fidiculanius Falcula, who had condemned Oppianicus, prosecuted especially because—and that was the point which in that trial was the hardest to excuse—he had sat as judge a few days after the appointment of a substitute? He was, indeed, prosecuted, and that twice. For Lucius Quinctius had brought him into extreme unpopularity by means of daily seditious and turbulent assemblies. On one trial a penalty was sought to be recovered from him, as from Junius, because he had sat as judge, not in his own decury, nor according to the law. He was prosecuted at a rather more peaceable time than Junius, but under almost the same law, and on very nearly the same indictment. But because at the trial shore was no sedition, no violence, and no crowd, he was easily acquitted at the first hearing. I do not count this acquittal.[*]⋯

What was Fidiculanius said to have done? To have received from Cluentius four hundred sesterces. Of what rank was he? A senator. He was accused according to that law by which an account is properly demanded of a senator in a prosecution for peculation, and he was most honourably acquitted. For the cause was pleaded according to the custom of our ancestors, without violence, without fear, without danger. Everything was fairly stated, and explained, and proved. The judges were taught that not only could a defendant be honestly condemned by a man who had not sat as a judge uninterruptedly, but that if that judge had known nothing else except what previous investigations it was clear had taken place in the case, he ought to have heard nothing else.

Then, also, those five judges, who, hunting for the vague rumours of ignorant men, acquitted him at the time, were unwilling that their clemency should be extravagantly praised; and if any one asked them whether they had sat as judges on Caius Fabricius, they said that they had, if they were asked whether he had been accused of any crime except of that poison which was said to have been endeavoured to be administered to Habitus, they said no; if, after that, they were asked what their decision had been, they said that they had condemned him. For no one acquitted him. In the same manner, if any question had been asked about Scamander, they would certainly have given the same answer, although he was acquitted by one vote; but at that time no one of those men would have liked that one vote to be called his.

Tokens

This	1	w	4
conciliation	1	w	16
of	1	w	18
good-will	1	w	27
was	1	w	30
laughed	1	w	37
at	2	w	39
and	1	w	43
so	1	w	45
was	2	w	48
this	1	w	52
assumption	1	w	62
of	2	w	64
the	1	w	67
character	1	w	76
of	3	w	78
a	10	w	79
good	2	w	83
man	1	w	86
as	4	w	89
in	1	w	91
the	2	w	94
gilded	1	w	100
statues	1	w	107
which	1	w	112
he	4	w	114
erected	1	w	121
in	2	w	123
front	1	w	128
of	4	w	130
the	3	w	133
temple	1	w	139
of	5	w	141
Juturna	1	w	148
at	4	w	151
the	4	w	154
bottom	1	w	160
of	6	w	162
which	2	w	167
he	7	w	169
had	1	w	172
the	5	w	175
following	1	w	184
inscription	1	w	195
engraved	1	w	203
that	1	w	210
the	6	w	213
kings	1	w	218
had	2	w	221
been	1	w	225
restored	1	w	233
by	1	w	235
him	1	w	238
to	3	w	240
the	7	w	243
favour	1	w	249
of	7	w	251
the	8	w	254
people	1	w	260
All	1	w	265
his	3	w	268
frauds	1	w	274
and	2	w	277
dishonest	1	w	286
tricks	1	w	292
were	1	w	296
brought	1	w	303
under	1	w	308
discussion	1	w	318
his	4	w	322
whole	1	w	327
life	1	w	331
which	3	w	337
has	1	w	340
been	2	w	344
spent	1	w	349
in	6	w	351
such	1	w	355
a	24	w	356
way	1	w	359
as	6	w	361
that	2	w	365
was	3	w	369
laid	1	w	373
open	1	w	377
his	5	w	381
domestic	1	w	389
poverty	1	w	396
the	9	w	400
profits	1	w	407
which	4	w	412
he	13	w	414
made	1	w	418
in	7	w	420
the	10	w	423
courts	1	w	429
of	9	w	431
law	1	w	434
were	2	w	439
all	1	w	442
brought	2	w	449
to	4	w	451
light	1	w	456
an	4	w	459
interpreter	1	w	470
of	10	w	472
peace	1	w	477
and	3	w	480
concord	1	w	487
who	2	w	490
regulated	1	w	499
everything	1	w	509
by	2	w	511
the	11	w	514
bribes	1	w	520
which	5	w	525
he	16	w	527
received	1	w	535
was	4	w	538
not	1	w	541
approved	1	w	549
of	11	w	551
Therefore	1	w	561
Stalenus	1	w	570
was	5	w	573
condemned	1	w	582
at	8	w	584
that	3	w	588
time	1	w	592
while	1	w	598
he	18	w	600
urged	1	w	605
the	12	w	608
same	1	w	612
defence	1	w	619
as	10	w	621
Attius	1	w	627
did	1	w	630
When	1	w	635
the	13	w	638
Cominii	1	w	645
did	2	w	648
the	14	w	651
same	2	w	655
thing	2	w	660
that	4	w	664
I	1	w	665
have	1	w	669
done	1	w	673
throughout	1	w	683
the	15	w	686
whole	2	w	691
of	12	w	693
this	2	w	697
cause	1	w	702
people	2	w	709
approved	2	w	717
of	13	w	719
them	1	w	723
Wherefore	1	w	733
if	2	w	736
by	3	w	738
the	17	w	741
condemnation	1	w	753
of	14	w	755
Stalenus	2	w	763
it	2	w	765
was	6	w	768
decided	1	w	775
that	5	w	779
Oppianicus	1	w	789
had	3	w	792
desired	1	w	799
to	5	w	801
corrupt	1	w	808
the	18	w	811
judges	1	w	817
that	6	w	823
Oppianicus	2	w	833
had	4	w	836
given	1	w	841
one	3	w	844
of	15	w	846
the	19	w	849
judges	2	w	855
money	1	w	860
to	6	w	862
purchase	1	w	870
the	20	w	873
votes	1	w	878
of	16	w	880
the	21	w	883
other	1	w	888
judges	3	w	894
since	1	w	901
it	3	w	903
has	3	w	906
been	3	w	910
already	1	w	917
settled	1	w	924
that	7	w	928
either	1	w	934
Cluentius	1	w	943
is	9	w	945
guilty	1	w	951
of	17	w	953
that	8	w	957
offence	1	w	964
or	6	w	967
else	1	w	971
Oppianicus	3	w	981
but	1	w	985
that	9	w	989
no	2	w	991
trace	1	w	996
whatever	1	w	1004
is	10	w	1006
found	1	w	1011
of	19	w	1013
any	1	w	1016
money	2	w	1021
belonging	1	w	1030
to	7	w	1032
Cluentius	2	w	1041
having	1	w	1047
been	4	w	1051
ever	3	w	1055
given	2	w	1060
to	8	w	1062
any	2	w	1065
judge	4	w	1070
while	2	w	1076
money	3	w	1081
belonging	2	w	1090
to	9	w	1092
Oppianicus	4	w	1102
was	7	w	1105
taken	1	w	1110
away	1	w	1114
after	1	w	1120
the	24	w	1123
trial	1	w	1128
was	8	w	1131
over	2	w	1135
from	1	w	1140
a	80	w	1141
judge	5	w	1146
can	1	w	1152
it	5	w	1154
be	8	w	1156
doubtful	1	w	1164
that	10	w	1168
that	11	w	1172
conviction	1	w	1182
of	20	w	1184
Stalenus	3	w	1192
does	1	w	1196
not	2	w	1199
only	1	w	1203
not	3	w	1206
make	1	w	1210
against	1	w	1217
Cluentius	3	w	1226
but	2	w	1230
is	11	w	1232
the	25	w	1235
greatest	1	w	1243
possible	1	w	1251
confirmation	1	w	1263
of	21	w	1265
our	3	w	1268
cause	2	w	1273
and	4	w	1276
of	22	w	1278
our	4	w	1281
defence	2	w	1288
Therefore	2	w	1298
I	2	w	1300
see	1	w	1303
now	1	w	1306
that	12	w	1310
the	26	w	1313
case	1	w	1317
respecting	1	w	1327
the	27	w	1330
decision	1	w	1338
of	23	w	1340
Junius	1	w	1346
is	13	w	1348
of	24	w	1350
this	3	w	1354
nature	1	w	1360
that	13	w	1365
I	3	w	1366
think	1	w	1371
it	6	w	1373
ought	3	w	1378
to	10	w	1380
be	9	w	1382
called	1	w	1388
an	14	w	1390
inroad	1	w	1396
of	25	w	1398
sedition	1	w	1406
an	15	w	1409
instance	1	w	1417
of	26	w	1419
the	28	w	1422
violence	1	w	1430
of	27	w	1432
the	29	w	1435
multitude	1	w	1444
an	17	w	1447
outrage	1	w	1454
on	26	w	1456
the	30	w	1459
part	1	w	1463
of	28	w	1465
a	104	w	1466
tribune	1	w	1473
any	3	w	1477
thing	3	w	1482
rather	1	w	1488
than	1	w	1492
a	108	w	1493
judicial	1	w	1501
proceeding	1	w	1511
But	1	w	1515
if	3	w	1517
any	4	w	1520
one	7	w	1523
calls	1	w	1528
that	14	w	1532
a	113	w	1533
regular	1	w	1540
trial	2	w	1545
still	1	w	1551
he	42	w	1553
must	1	w	1557
inevitably	1	w	1567
admit	1	w	1572
this	4	w	1576
that	15	w	1582
that	16	w	1586
penalty	1	w	1593
which	6	w	1598
was	9	w	1601
sought	1	w	1607
to	11	w	1609
be	10	w	1611
recovered	1	w	1620
from	2	w	1624
Junius	2	w	1630
cannot	1	w	1636
by	4	w	1638
any	5	w	1641
means	1	w	1646
be	11	w	1648
connected	1	w	1657
with	1	w	1661
the	32	w	1664
cause	3	w	1669
of	29	w	1671
Cluentius	4	w	1680
That	1	w	1685
decision	2	w	1693
of	30	w	1695
the	33	w	1698
tribunal	1	w	1706
over	4	w	1710
which	7	w	1715
Junius	3	w	1721
presided	1	w	1729
was	10	w	1733
brought	3	w	1740
about	1	w	1745
by	5	w	1747
evidence	1	w	1755
The	3	w	1759
cases	1	w	1764
of	31	w	1766
Bulbus	1	w	1772
of	32	w	1775
Popillius	1	w	1784
and	5	w	1788
of	33	w	1790
Gutta	1	w	1795
do	5	w	1798
not	5	w	1801
make	2	w	1805
against	2	w	1812
Cluentius	5	w	1821
That	2	w	1826
of	34	w	1828
Stalenus	4	w	1836
is	17	w	1838
actually	1	w	1846
in	25	w	1848
favour	2	w	1854
of	35	w	1856
Cluentius	6	w	1865
Let	1	w	1869
us	26	w	1871
now	2	w	1874
see	2	w	1877
if	4	w	1879
there	1	w	1884
is	18	w	1886
any	6	w	1889
other	2	w	1894
decision	3	w	1902
which	8	w	1907
we	3	w	1909
can	3	w	1912
produce	1	w	1919
which	9	w	1924
is	20	w	1926
favourable	1	w	1936
to	12	w	1938
Cluentius	7	w	1947
Was	1	w	1951
not	6	w	1954
Caius	1	w	1959
Fidiculanius	1	w	1971
Falcula	1	w	1978
who	4	w	1982
had	5	w	1985
condemned	2	w	1994
Oppianicus	5	w	2004
prosecuted	1	w	2015
especially	1	w	2025
because	1	w	2032
and	6	w	2036
that	17	w	2040
was	11	w	2043
the	36	w	2046
point	1	w	2051
which	10	w	2056
in	27	w	2058
that	18	w	2062
trial	3	w	2067
was	12	w	2070
the	37	w	2073
hardest	1	w	2080
to	13	w	2082
excuse	1	w	2088
he	50	w	2091
had	6	w	2094
sat	1	w	2097
as	23	w	2099
judge	6	w	2104
a	164	w	2105
few	1	w	2108
days	1	w	2112
after	2	w	2117
the	38	w	2120
appointment	1	w	2131
of	36	w	2133
a	168	w	2134
substitute	1	w	2144
He	1	w	2147
was	13	w	2150
indeed	1	w	2157
prosecuted	2	w	2168
and	7	w	2172
that	19	w	2176
twice	1	w	2181
For	1	w	2185
Lucius	1	w	2191
Quinctius	1	w	2200
had	7	w	2203
brought	4	w	2210
him	2	w	2213
into	1	w	2217
extreme	1	w	2224
unpopularity	1	w	2236
by	6	w	2238
means	2	w	2243
of	37	w	2245
daily	1	w	2250
seditious	1	w	2259
and	8	w	2262
turbulent	1	w	2271
assemblies	1	w	2281
On	1	w	2284
one	8	w	2287
trial	4	w	2292
a	179	w	2293
penalty	2	w	2300
was	14	w	2303
sought	2	w	2309
to	15	w	2311
be	13	w	2313
recovered	2	w	2322
from	3	w	2326
him	3	w	2329
as	27	w	2332
from	4	w	2336
Junius	4	w	2342
because	2	w	2350
he	52	w	2352
had	8	w	2355
sat	2	w	2358
as	28	w	2360
judge	7	w	2365
not	7	w	2369
in	32	w	2371
his	9	w	2374
own	1	w	2377
decury	1	w	2383
nor	1	w	2387
according	1	w	2396
to	16	w	2398
the	39	w	2401
law	2	w	2404
He	2	w	2407
was	15	w	2410
prosecuted	3	w	2420
at	36	w	2422
a	191	w	2423
rather	2	w	2429
more	1	w	2433
peaceable	1	w	2442
time	2	w	2446
than	2	w	2450
Junius	5	w	2456
but	3	w	2460
under	2	w	2465
almost	1	w	2471
the	41	w	2474
same	3	w	2478
law	3	w	2481
and	9	w	2485
on	33	w	2487
very	2	w	2491
nearly	1	w	2497
the	42	w	2500
same	4	w	2504
indictment	1	w	2514
But	2	w	2518
because	3	w	2525
at	38	w	2527
the	43	w	2530
trial	5	w	2535
shore	1	w	2540
was	16	w	2543
no	12	w	2545
sedition	2	w	2553
no	13	w	2556
violence	2	w	2564
and	10	w	2568
no	14	w	2570
crowd	1	w	2575
he	58	w	2578
was	17	w	2581
easily	1	w	2587
acquitted	1	w	2596
at	39	w	2598
the	44	w	2601
first	1	w	2606
hearing	1	w	2613
I	4	w	2615
do	6	w	2617
not	8	w	2620
count	1	w	2625
this	5	w	2629
acquittal	1	w	2638
The	4	w	2642
passage	1	w	2649
which	11	w	2654
follows	1	w	2661
in	36	w	2663
the	45	w	2666
text	1	w	2670
is	23	w	2672
given	3	w	2677
up	2	w	2679
by	7	w	2681
Orellius	1	w	2689
altogether	1	w	2699
corrupt	2	w	2706
and	11	w	2710
is	24	w	2712
wholly	1	w	2718
unintelligible	1	w	2732
as	34	w	2734
it	18	w	2736
stands	1	w	2742
at	40	w	2744
present	1	w	2751
Weiske	1	w	2758
thinks	1	w	2764
that	20	w	2768
several	1	w	2775
words	1	w	2780
have	2	w	2784
dropped	1	w	2791
out	4	w	2794
What	1	w	2799
was	18	w	2802
Fidiculanius	2	w	2814
said	1	w	2818
to	18	w	2820
have	3	w	2824
done	2	w	2828
To	1	w	2831
have	4	w	2835
received	2	w	2843
from	5	w	2847
Cluentius	8	w	2856
four	1	w	2860
hundred	1	w	2867
sesterces	1	w	2876
Of	1	w	2879
what	2	w	2883
rank	1	w	2887
was	19	w	2890
he	64	w	2892
A	3	w	2894
senator	1	w	2901
He	3	w	2904
was	20	w	2907
accused	1	w	2914
according	2	w	2923
to	20	w	2925
that	21	w	2929
law	4	w	2932
by	8	w	2934
which	12	w	2939
an	40	w	2941
account	1	w	2948
is	26	w	2950
properly	1	w	2958
demanded	1	w	2966
of	38	w	2968
a	242	w	2969
senator	2	w	2976
in	40	w	2978
a	244	w	2979
prosecution	1	w	2990
for	4	w	2993
peculation	1	w	3003
and	14	w	3007
he	65	w	3009
was	21	w	3012
most	2	w	3016
honourably	1	w	3026
acquitted	2	w	3035
For	2	w	3039
the	47	w	3042
cause	7	w	3047
was	22	w	3050
pleaded	1	w	3057
according	3	w	3066
to	22	w	3068
the	48	w	3071
custom	1	w	3077
of	39	w	3079
our	9	w	3082
ancestors	1	w	3091
without	1	w	3099
violence	3	w	3107
without	2	w	3115
fear	1	w	3119
without	3	w	3127
danger	1	w	3133
Everything	1	w	3144
was	23	w	3147
fairly	1	w	3153
stated	1	w	3159
and	15	w	3163
explained	1	w	3172
and	16	w	3176
proved	3	w	3182
The	5	w	3186
judges	4	w	3192
were	3	w	3196
taught	1	w	3202
that	22	w	3206
not	9	w	3209
only	2	w	3213
could	1	w	3218
a	265	w	3219
defendant	1	w	3228
be	16	w	3230
honestly	1	w	3238
condemned	3	w	3247
by	9	w	3249
a	267	w	3250
man	3	w	3253
who	6	w	3256
had	9	w	3259
not	10	w	3262
sat	3	w	3265
as	41	w	3267
a	272	w	3268
judge	9	w	3273
uninterruptedly	1	w	3288
but	4	w	3292
that	23	w	3296
if	5	w	3298
that	24	w	3302
judge	10	w	3307
had	10	w	3310
known	1	w	3315
nothing	1	w	3322
else	2	w	3326
except	1	w	3332
what	3	w	3336
previous	1	w	3344
investigations	1	w	3358
it	23	w	3360
was	24	w	3363
clear	1	w	3368
had	11	w	3371
taken	2	w	3376
place	1	w	3381
in	47	w	3383
the	49	w	3386
case	3	w	3390
he	70	w	3393
ought	8	w	3398
to	25	w	3400
have	5	w	3404
heard	1	w	3409
nothing	2	w	3416
else	3	w	3420
Then	1	w	3425
also	1	w	3430
those	1	w	3436
five	1	w	3440
judges	5	w	3446
who	7	w	3450
hunting	1	w	3458
for	5	w	3461
the	50	w	3464
vague	1	w	3469
rumours	1	w	3476
of	40	w	3478
ignorant	1	w	3486
men	3	w	3489
acquitted	3	w	3499
him	4	w	3502
at	55	w	3504
the	51	w	3507
time	3	w	3511
were	4	w	3516
unwilling	1	w	3525
that	25	w	3529
their	1	w	3534
clemency	1	w	3542
should	1	w	3548
be	17	w	3550
extravagantly	1	w	3563
praised	1	w	3570
and	17	w	3574
if	6	w	3576
any	7	w	3579
one	11	w	3582
asked	1	w	3587
them	2	w	3591
whether	1	w	3598
they	1	w	3602
had	12	w	3605
sat	4	w	3608
as	45	w	3610
judges	6	w	3616
on	44	w	3618
Caius	2	w	3623
Fabricius	1	w	3632
they	2	w	3637
said	2	w	3641
that	26	w	3645
they	3	w	3649
had	13	w	3652
if	7	w	3655
they	4	w	3659
were	5	w	3663
asked	2	w	3668
whether	2	w	3675
he	85	w	3677
had	14	w	3680
been	5	w	3684
accused	2	w	3691
of	41	w	3693
any	8	w	3696
crime	1	w	3701
except	2	w	3707
of	42	w	3709
that	27	w	3713
poison	1	w	3719
which	13	w	3724
was	25	w	3727
said	3	w	3731
to	26	w	3733
have	6	w	3737
been	6	w	3741
endeavoured	1	w	3752
to	27	w	3754
be	20	w	3756
administered	1	w	3768
to	28	w	3770
Habitus	1	w	3777
they	5	w	3782
said	4	w	3786
no	23	w	3788
if	8	w	3791
after	3	w	3797
that	28	w	3801
they	6	w	3806
were	6	w	3810
asked	3	w	3815
what	4	w	3819
their	2	w	3824
decision	4	w	3832
had	15	w	3835
been	7	w	3839
they	7	w	3844
said	5	w	3848
that	29	w	3852
they	8	w	3856
had	16	w	3859
condemned	4	w	3868
him	5	w	3871
For	3	w	3875
no	24	w	3877
one	12	w	3880
acquitted	4	w	3889
him	6	w	3892
In	1	w	3895
the	65	w	3898
same	5	w	3902
manner	1	w	3908
if	9	w	3911
any	9	w	3914
question	1	w	3922
had	17	w	3925
been	8	w	3929
asked	4	w	3934
about	2	w	3939
Scamander	1	w	3948
they	9	w	3953
would	1	w	3958
certainly	1	w	3967
have	7	w	3971
given	4	w	3976
the	67	w	3979
same	6	w	3983
answer	1	w	3989
although	1	w	3998
he	94	w	4000
was	26	w	4003
acquitted	5	w	4012
by	10	w	4014
one	13	w	4017
vote	2	w	4021
but	5	w	4025
at	63	w	4027
that	30	w	4031
time	4	w	4035
no	25	w	4037
one	14	w	4040
of	43	w	4042
those	2	w	4047
men	5	w	4050
would	2	w	4055
have	8	w	4059
liked	1	w	4064
that	31	w	4068
one	15	w	4071
vote	3	w	4075
to	29	w	4077
be	23	w	4079
called	2	w	4085
his	11	w	4088