120

PRÆFECTUS, MAGISTER morum.

Mars, Liv. xl. 45. Before they began to execute their office, they swore that they would do nothing through favour or hatred, but that they would act uprightly; and when they resigned their office, they swore that they had done so. Then going up to the treasury (in ærarium ascendentes), they left a list of those whom they had made ærarii, Liv. xxix. 37.

A record of the proceedings of the censors (memoria publica recensionis, tabulis publicis impressa) was kept in the temple of the Nymphs, Cic. pro Mil. 27., and is also said to have been preserved with great care by their descendants, Dionys. i. 74.

One of the censors, to whom it fell by lot, Varr. Lat. L. v. 9. after the census was finished, offered a solemn sacrifice (lustrum condidit) in the Campus Martius. See p. 79.

The power of the censors continued unimpaired to the tribuneship of Clodius, A. U. 695, who got a law passed, ordering that no senator should be degraded by the censors, unless he had been formally accused and condemned by both censors, Dio. xxxviii. 13.; but this law was abrogated, and the powers of the censorship restored soon after by Q. Metellus Scipio, A. U. 702. Ascon. in Cic. Dio. xl. 57. Under the emperors the office of censor was abolished; but the chief parts of it were exercised by the emperors themselves, or by other magistrates.

Julius Cæsar made a review of the people (recensum populi egit) after a new manner, in the several streets, by means of the proprietors of the houses (vicatim per dominos insularum), Suet. Jul. 41.; but this was not a review of the whole Roman people, but only of the poorer sort, who received a monthly gratuity of corn from the public, ibid. which used to be given them in former times, first at a low price, Liv. ii. 34., and afterwards, by the law of Clodius, for nought, Cic. pro Sext. 25. Ascon. in Cic.

Julius Cæsar was appointed by the senate to inspect the morals of the citizens for three years, Dio. xliii. 14. under the title of PRÆFECTUS MORUM vel moribus, Suet. Jul. 76. Cic. Fam. ix. 15.; afterwards for life, under the title of censor, Dio. xliv. 5. A power similar to this seems to have been conferred on Pompey in his third consulship (corrigendis moribus delectus), Tacit. Ann. ii. 28.

Augustus thrice made a review of the people; the first and last time with a colleague, and the second time alone, Suet. Aug. 27.

He was invested by the senate with the same censorian power as Julius Cæsar, repeatedly for five years, according to Dion Cassius, Jiii. 17. Liv. ii. 10. 30. according to Suetonius for life (recepit et morum legumque regimen perpetuum), Suet. Aug. 27. under the title of MAGISTER MORUM, Fast. Cons. Hence Horace, Epist. ii. 1.

Cùm tot sustineas, ac tanta negotia solus,

Res Italas armis tuteris, moribus ornes,
Legibus emendes, &c.

Augustus, however, declined the title of censor, Suet. 27. although he is so called by Macrobius, Sat. ii. 4.; and Ovid says of him,

Sic agitur CENSURA, et sic exempla parantur,
Cum vindex, alios quod monet ipse, facit.

Fast. vi. 647.

TRIBUNES OF THE PEOPLE.

121

Some of the succeeding emperors assumed this title, particularly those of the Flavian family, but most of them rejected it; as Trajan, Plin. Paneg. 45. after whom we rarely find it mentioned, Dio. liii. 18.

Tiberius thought the censorship unfit for his time (non id tempus censura), Tacit. Ann. ii. 33. It was therefore intermitted during his government, as it was likewise during that of his successor.

A review of the people was made by Claudius and L. Vitellius, the father of the emperor A. Vitellius, A. U. 800. Suet. Claud. 16. Vit. 2.; by Vespasian and Titus, A. U. 827. Suet. Vesp. 8. Tit. 6. ; but never after. Censorinus de die nat. 18. says, that this review was made only seventy-five times during 650, or rather 630 years, from its first institution under Servius to the time of Vespasian; after which it was totally discontinued, ibid.

Decius endeavoured to restore the censorship in the person of Valerian, but without effect. The corrupt morals of Rome at that period could not bear such a magistrate. Trebell. Pollio in Valer.

IV. TRIBUNES OF THE PEOPLE.

THE plebeians being oppressed by the patricians on account of debt, Liv. ii. 23. &c. at the instigation of one Sicinius, made a secession to a mountain, afterwards called Mons Sacer*, three miles from Rome, A. U. 260. ibid. 32. ; nor could they be prevailed on to return, till they obtained from the patricians a remission of debts for those who were insolvent, and liberty to such as had been given up to serve their creditors; and likewise that the plebeians should have proper magistrates of their own to protect their rights, whose persons should be sacred and inviolable (sacrosancti), Liv. iii. 33. 55. Dionys. vi. 89. They were called TRIBUNES, according to Varro, de Ling. Lat. l. iv. 14., because they were at first created from the tribunes of the soldiers.

Two tribunes were at first created, Cic. pro Corn. 1., at the assembly by curia, who, according to Livy, created three colleagues to themselves, ii. 33. In the year 283, they were first elected at the Comitia Tributa, c. 58., † and A. U. 297, ten tribunes were created, Liv. iii. 30. two out of each class, which number continued ever after. No patrician could be made tribune unless first adopted into a plebeian family, as was the case with Clodius the enemy of Cicero, pro Dom. 16. Suet. Jul. 20. At one time, however, we find two patricians of consular dignity elected tribunes, Liv. iii. 65. And no one could be made tribune or plebeian ædile, whose father had borne a curule office, and was alive, Liv. xxx. 19., nor whose father was a captive, xxviii. 21.

*“It had its name from being consecrated to Jupiter by the plebeians, when they were leaving their camp."-Nieb. i. p. 533.

Volero was the author of the bill which transferred the election of tribunes from the comitia curiata to the comitia tributa. In these assemblies the people's own magistrates might preside: all the citizens of the country tribes, as well as the inhabitants of Rome, had a right of voting, there was no necessity for any previous senatus consultum, and the augurs could not put off the holding of the comitia, or annul the election of such tribunes as were very obnoxious to the patricians, under the pretence that the omens were inauspicious, for these comitia were not preceded by taking the auspices. After a violent struggle, Livy tells us that the law was quietly passed (Lex silentio perfertur, ii. 57.).

122

ELECTION OF TRIBUNES THEIR POWERS.

The tribunes were at first chosen indiscriminately from among the plebeians; but it was ordained by the Atinian law, some think A. U. 623, that no one should be made tribune who was not a senator, Gell. xiv. 8. Suet. Aug. 10. And we read, that when there were no senatorian candidates, on account of the powers of that office being diminished, Augustus chose them from the Equites, Suet. Aug. 40. Dio. liv. 26. 30. But others think, that the Atinian law only ordained, that those who were made tribunes should of course be senators, and did not prescribe any restriction concerning their election.* See Manutius de Legg. It is certain, however, that under the emperors, no one but a senator had a right to stand candidate for the tribuneship (jus tribunatûs petendi ), Plin. Ep. ii. 9.

One of the tribunes, chosen by lot, presided at the comitia for electing tribunes, Liv. iii. 64., which charge was called sors comitiorum, ibid. After the abdication of the decemviri, when there were no tribunes, the Pontifex Maximus presided at their election, c. 54. If the assembly was broken off (si comitia dirempta essent), before the ten tribunes were elected, those who were created might choose (cooptare) colleagues for themselves to complete the number, c. 65. But a law was immediately passed by one Trebonius [A. U. 305] to prevent this for the future, which enacted, "That he who presided "should continue the comitia, and recall the tribes to give their votes, "till ten were elected," ibid.†

The tribunes always entered on their office the 10th of December (ante diem quartum Idûs Decembris), because the first tribunes were elected on that day, Liv. xxxix. 52. Dionys. vi. 89. In the time of Cicero, however, Asconius says, it was on the 5th (nonis Decembris), in procem. Verr. 10. But this seems not to have been so; for Cicero himself, on that day, calls Cato tribunus designatus, pro Sext. 28.

The tribunes wore no toga prætexta, nor had they any external mark of dignity, except a kind of beadle called viator, who went before them. It is thought they were not allowed to use a carriage, Cic. Phil. ii. 24. Plut. Quæst. Rom. 81. When they administered justice, they had no tribunal, but sat on subsellia or benches, Ascon. in Cic. They had, however, on all occasions, a right of precedency; and every body was obliged to rise in their presence, Plin. Ep. i. 23.

The power of the tribunes at first was very limited. It consisted in hindering, not in acting, Dionys. vii. 17., and was expressed by the word VETO, I forbid it. They had only the right of seizing, but not of summoning (prehensionem sed non vocationem habebant), Gell. xiii. 12. Their office was only to assist the plebeians against the patricians and magistrates (Auxilii, non pœnæ jus datum illi potestati), Liv. ii. 35. vi. 37. Hence they were said esse privati, sine imperio, sine magistratu, ii. 56., not being dignified with the name of magis

From the Atinian law, it appears evident that the election to the tribuneship was possible without a previous election to the quæstorship; because the latter office gave an immediate right to the senate. See the note, p. 4.

For in the year preceding, after five new tribunes had been elected, Duilius dismissed the assembly, alleging that he had satisfied the law, which expressly directed that, in case the whole number of tribunes were not chosen on the day of election, those who were chosen should themselves nominate persons to fill the vacant places : which was called cooptatio.

trates, Plutarch. in Coriol. et Quæst. Rom. 81., as they were afterwards, Liv. iv. 2. Sall. Jug. 37. They were not even allowed to enter the senate. See p. 15.

But, in process of time, they increased their influence to such a degree that, under pretext of defending the rights of the people, they did almost whatever they pleased. They hindered the collection of tribute, Liv. v. 12., the enlisting of soldiers, iv. 1., and the creation of magistrates, which they did at one time for five years, Liv. vi. 35. They could put a negative (intercedere) upon all the decrees of the senate and ordinances of the people, Cic. pro Mil. 6. Liv. xlv. 21. Polyb. vi. 14., and a single tribune, by his VETO, could stop the proceedings of all the other magistrates, which Cæsar calls extremum jus tribunorum, de Bell. Civ. i. 4. Liv. ii. 44. iv. 6. 48. vi. 35. Such was the force of this word, that whoever did not obey it, whether magistrate or private person, was immediately ordered to be led to prison by a viator, or a day was appointed for his trial before the people, as a violator of the sacred power of the tribunes, the exercise of which it was a crime to restrain (in ordinem cogere), Plin. Ep. i. 23. Liv. xxv. 3, 4. Plutarch. in Mario. They first began with bringing the chief of the patricians to their trial before the Comitia Tributa; as they did Coriolanus, Dionys. vii. 65.

If any one hurt a tribune in word or deed, he was held accursed (sacer), and his goods were confiscated [to the temple of Ceres], Liv. iii. 55. Dionys. vi. 89. viii. 17. Under the sanction of this law, they carried their power to an extravagant height. They claimed a right to prevent consuls from setting out to their provinces, Plutarch. in Crass. Dio. xxxix. 39., and even to pull victorious generals from their triumphal chariot, Cic. pro Col. 14. They stopped the course of justice by putting off trials, Liv. iii. 25. Cic. Phil. ii. 2. in Vatin. 14., and hindering the execution of a sentence, Cic. de Prov. Cons. 8. Liv. xxxviii. 60. They sometimes ordered the military tribunes, and even the consuls themselves, to prison, Liv. iv. 26. v. 9. Epit. 48. 55. Cic. in Vatin. 9, 10. Dio. xxxvii. 50. (as the Ephori at Lacedæmon did their kings, Nep. in Paus. 3., whom the tribunes at Rome resembled, Cic. de Legg. iii. 7. 9.) Hence it was said, Datum sub jugum tribunitia potestatis consulatum fuisse, Liv. iv. 26.

The tribunes usually did not give their negative to a law, till leave had been granted to speak for and against it, Liv. xlv. 21.

The only effectual method of resisting the power of the tribunes was to procure one or more of their number (e collegio tribunorum), to put a negative on the proceedings of the rest, Liv. ii. 44. iv. 48. vi. 35; but those who did so might afterwards be brought to a trial before the people by their colleagues, v. 29.†

:

"In the seventh century of the city, the tribunes were to the fullest extent a national magistracy: during the first two centuries of their existence, they were just as decidedly a mere plebeian magistracy; but this they were incontestably only their province was neither government nor administration. In their most essential character they were representatives of the commonalty: as such, protectors of the liberties of their order against the supreme power, not partakers in that power: as such, too, not empowered to impose a mulct (multam dicere), but only to propose the imposition of it to the commonalty (irrogare)."— Nieb. i. p. 543.

+"The tribunate of the people, about the middle of the fourth century, underwent an important change. Hitherto a plurality of votes had always been decisive in

124

POWER OF THE TRIBUNES, HOW LIMITED.

Sometimes a tribune was prevailed on, by entreaties or threats, to withdraw his negative (intercessione desistere), or he demanded time to consider it (noctem sibi ad deliberandum postulavit; se postero die moram nullam esse facturum), Cic. pro Sext. 34. Attic. iv. 2. Fam. viii. 8.; or the consuls were armed with dictatorial power to oppose him, Cæs. de Bell. Civ. i. 5. Cic. Phil. ii. 21, 22. (see p. 20.); from the terror of which, M. Antonius and Q. Cassius Longinus, tribunes of the commons, together with Curio and Coelius, fled from the city to Cæsar into Gaul, and afforded him a pretext for crossing the river Rubicon, which was the boundary of his province, and of leading his army to Rome, Cic. Phil. ii. 21, 22. Dio. xl. 13. Appian. Civil. ii. p. 448. Plutarch, in Cæs. p. 727. Lucan. i. 273. *

We also find the senate exercising a right of limiting the power of the tribunes, which was called CIRCUMSCRIPTIO, Cic. Att. vii. 9. pro Mil. 33. Cæs. de Bell. Civ. i. 32., and of removing them from their office (a republicâ removendi, i. e. curiâ et foro interdicendi), Cæs. de Bell. Civ. iii. 21. Suet. Jul. 16., as they did likewise other magistrates, ibid. Cic. Phil. xiii. 9. On one occasion the senate even sent a tribune to prison, Dio. xl. 45.; but this happened at a time when all order was violated, ibid. 46.

The tribuneship was suspended when the decemviri were created, Liv. iii. 32., but not when a dictator was appointed, vi. 38.

The power of the tribunes was confined to the city †, Dionys. viii. 87., and a mile around it (neque enim provocationem esse longius ab urbe

it: the agrarian bill of 339 was lost, because the patricians gained six of the tribunes, i. e. a majority: the great exertions made to obtain this majority would have been needless, if a single veto had already been sufficient; and if the four tribunes, who made the cause of the consul C. Sempronius their own, could have annulled their colleagues' impeachment by a word, they would not have tried to mollify the people by putting on mourning and by entreaties. (Liv. iv. 42. 48.) On the other hand, in 360 and 361, the bill regarding Veii was stopped by two of the tribunes (Liv. v. 29.), just as the elections were in 380 by Licinius and Sextius; so that it was not in the power of the other eight to remove this impediment. Hence the limits of the time within which this innovation falls are not to be mistaken; but it is not so clear with what view it was introduced. It seems, however, that the government alone can have desired such a change, with a view of stemming the proceedings of the tribunes: one or two out of the ten would still be likely to take its side; while all hope of gaining a majority was sure to grow less and less, so long as the independence and prosperity of the people were daily becoming more firmly established, and as every body could see that the power of the patricians was losing ground."- Nieb. ii. p. 435.

If a tribune persevered in his opposition (intercessio), his colleagues sometimes moved the comilia to depose him. Thus when Octavius, one of the tribunes, endeavoured to obstruct the passing of the Agrarian law, A. U. 620, his colleague, Tiberius Gracchus, assembled the tribes, and he was deposed accordingly. This example was afterwards imitated by the tribune A. Gabinius, when his colleague, L. Trebellius, opposed the passing a decree for committing to Pompey the conduct of the piratic war, with exorbitant powers unknown to the laws. Gabinius moved to have Trebellius deposed from his office; and seventeen of the thirty-five tribes had already voted against him, when he withdrew his opposition.

+ When one of the tribunes, A. U. 270, would not suffer the consuls to levy troops, till they had first brought the senate's decree for the partition of the public lands, the consuls, in order to surmount the difficulty, erected their tribunal without the city to summon the citizens to enlist; where the tribune could give them no opposition, for the reason mentioned in the text.