You say that Sulla was named by the Allobroges.—Who denies it? but read the information, and
 see how he was named. They said that Lucius Cassius had said that, among other men, Autronius
 was favourable to their designs. I ask, did Cassius say that Sulla was? Never. They say that
 they themselves inquired of Cassius what Sulla's opinions were. Observe the diligence of the
 Gauls. They, knowing nothing of the life or character of the man, but only having heard that he
 and Autronius had met with one common disaster, asked whether his inclinations were the same?
 what then? Even if Cassius had made answer that Sulla was of the same opinion, and was
 favourable to their views, still it would not seem to me that that reply ought to be made matter
 of accusation against him. How so? Because, as it was his object to instigate the barbarians to
 war, it was no business of his to weaken their expectations, or to acquit those men of whom they
 did entertain some suspicions. But yet he did not reply, that
 Sulla was favourable to their designs. And, in truth, it would have been an absurdity, after he
 had named every one else of his own accord, to make no mention of Sulla till he was reminded of
 him and asked about him. Unless you think this probable, that Lucius Cassius had quite forgotten
 the name of Publius Sulla. Even if the high rank of the man, and his unfortunate condition, and
 the relics of his ancient dignity had not made him notorious, still the mention of Autronius
 must have recalled Sulla to his recollection. In truth, it is my opinion that when Cassius was
 enumerating the authority of the chief men of the conspiracy for the purpose of exciting the
 minds of the Allobroges as he knew that the foreign nations are especially moved by an
 illustrious name he could not have named Autronius before Sulla, if he had been able to name
 Sulla at all. But no one can be induced to believe this,—that
 the Gauls, the moment that Autronius was named, should have thought, on account of the
 similarity of their misfortunes, that it was worth their while to make inquiries about Sulla,
 but that Cassius, if he really was implicated in this wickedness, should never have once
 recollected Sulla, even after he had named Autronius. However, what was the reply which Cassius
 made about Sulla? He said that he was not sure. “He does not acquit him,” says Torquatus. I have
 said before, that, even if he had accused him, when he was interrogated in this manner, his
 reply ought not to have been made matter of accusation against Sulla. But I think that, in judicial proceedings and examinations, the thing to be
 inquired is, not whether any one is exculpated, but whether any one is inculpated. And in truth,
 when Cassius says that he does not know, is he seeking to exculpate Sulla, or proving clearly
 enough that he really does not know? He is unwilling to compromise him with the Gauls. Why so?
 That they may not mention him in their information? what? If he had supposed that there was any
 danger of their ever giving any information at all, would he have made that confession
 respecting himself? He did not know it. I suppose, O judges, Sulla was the only person about
 whom Cassius was kept in the dark. For he certainly was well informed about every one else; and
 it was thoroughly proved that a great deal of the conspiracy was hatched at his house. As he did
 not like to deny that Sulla made one of the conspirators, his object being to give the Gauls as
 much hope as possible, and as he did not venture to assert what was absolutely false, he said
 that he did not know. But this is quite evident, that as he, who knew the truth about every one,
 said that he did not know about Sulla, the same weight is due to this denial of his as if he had
 said that be did know that he had nothing to do with the conspiracy. For when it
 is perfectly certain that a man is acquainted with all the conspirators, his ignorance of any
 one ought to be considered an acquittal of him. But I am not asking now whether Cassius acquits
 Sulla; this is quite sufficient for me, that there is not one word to implicate Sulla in the
 whole information of the Allobroges. 
 Torquatus being cut off from this article of his accusation, again turns against me, and
 accuses me. He says that I have made an entry in the public registers of a different statement
 from that which was really made. O ye immortal gods! (for I will give you what belongs to you;
 nor can I attribute so much to my own ability, as to think that I was able, in that most
 turbulent tempest which was afflicting the republic, to manage, of my own power, so many and
 such important affairs,—affairs arising so unexpectedly, and of such various characters,) it was
 you, in truth, who then inflamed my mind with the desire of saving my country; it was you who
 turned me from all other thoughts to the one idea of preserving the republic; it was you who,
 amid all that darkness of error and ignorance, held a bright light before my mind!