6 medicamenta publice vendiderunt. Alia deinde lex asperrimum crimen nova pocna persequitur, quae Pompeia de parricidiis vocatur. qua cavetur, ut, si quis parentis aut filii aut omnino adfectionis eius, quae nuncupatione parricidii continetur, fata properaverit, sive clam sive palam id ausus fuerit, nec non is, cuius dolo malo id factum est, vel conscius criminis existit, licet extraneus sit, poena parricidii punietur et neque gladio neque ignibus neque ulla alia sollemni poena subicietur, sed insutus culleo cum cane et gallo gallinaceo et vipera et simia et inter eius ferales angustias comprehensus, secundum quod regionis qualitas tulerit, vel in vicinum mare vel in amnem proiciatur, ut omni elementorum usu vivus carere incipiat et ei caelum superstiti, terra mortuo auferatur. si quis autem alias cognatione vel adfinitate coniunctas personas

§ 6. The date of the lex Pompeia de parricidiis is B. C. 52.

By nova poena is not meant 'recens inventa' but 'strange, unparallelled;' its great antiquity is attested by Val. Maximus 1. 1. 14.

The wide meaning of parricidium is perhaps to be accounted for by varieties of derivation ; συστέλλοντες . . . τὴν πρώτην συλλαβὴν καὶ βραχείαν ποιοῦντες, τοὺς γονέας (pärentes), ἐκτείνοντες δέ, τοὺς ὑπηκόους (parentes) onpaívovou, Laurentius Lydus de mag. Rom. i. 26; 'Parricida, quod vel a pari componitur, vel a patre: quibusdam a parente videtur esse .... Prisc. gram. I. Paricida non ubique is, qui parentem occidisset, sed qualemcunque hominem... Lex Numae... si quis hominem liberum morti duit, paricida esto,' Festus; cf. Cic. pro Cluent. 11, Livy 40. 24. Quinctil. inst. 8. 6. 35. The lex Pompeia confined the term to the killing of ascendants, husbands, wives, consobrini, stepfathers and stepmothers, fathers- and mothers-in-law, patrons and descendants, except the killing of a son by his father, Dig. 48. 9. 1. Hadrian sentenced a man who killed his son to deportatio, Dig. ib. 5, but this was not included under parricide till the time of Constantine, p. 117 supr.

Accessories were punished as severely as principals also under the lex Cornelia de sicariis (Cod. 9. 16. 7) and the lex Iulia peculatus, Dig. 48. 13. 1.

The punishment of the sack was very ancient among the Romans : 'Tarquinius rex M. Tullium. . . culleo insutum in mare abici iussit' Val. Maximus 1. 1. 13: cf. more maiorum, Dig. 48. 9. 9. pr. and 1: cf. Cic. pro Rosc. Am. 25, Epist. ad Quint. fratr. i. 2, Juvenal, Sat. iii. 8. 212 sq. The selection of animals was supposed to be symbolical, peтà .., ἀσεβῶν ζώων ἀσεβὴς ἄνθρωπος Dosith. iii. 16, ... τὰ δὲ προειρημένα θήρια ἐμβάλλεται διὰ τοῦτο, ἐπειδὴ ὁμοιότροπα αὐτῷ ἐστί· τὰ μὲν γὰρ ἀναιρεῖ τοὺς γονεῖς, τὰ δὲ τῆς πρὸς αὐτοὺς οὐκ ἀπέχεται μάχης Theoph. If there was no sea or river near, the criminal was torn asunder by wild beasts, 'hoc ita, si mare proximum sit: alioquin bestiis obicitur' Dig. 48. 9. 9. pr.

necaverit, poenam legis Corneliae de sicariis sustinebit. Item 7 lex Cornelia de falsis, quae etiam testamentaria vocatur, poenam irrogat ei, qui testamentum vel aliud instrumentum falsum scripserit signaverit recitaverit subiecerit quive signum adulterinum fecerit sculpserit expresserit sciens dolo malo. eiusque legis poena in servos ultimum supplicium est, quod et in lege de sicariis et veneficis servatur, in liberos vero deportatio. Item lex Iulia de vi publica seu privata adversus 8 eos exoritur, qui vim vel armatam vel sine armis commiserint. sed si quidem armata vis arguatur, deportatio ei ex lege Iulia de vi publica irrogatur: si vero sine armis, in tertiam partem bonorum publicatio imponitur. sin autem per vim raptus virginis vel viduae vel sanctimonialis vel aliae fuerit perpetratus, tunc et peccatores et ei, qui opem flagitio dederunt, capite puniuntur secundum nostrae constitutionis definitionem, ex qua haec apertius possibile est scire. Lex Iulia peculatus 9 eos punit, qui pecuniam vel rem publicam vel sacram vel

§ 7. This lex, which is called Cornelia testamentaria numaria by Cicero (in Verrem 21. 42), was passed by Sulla about the same time as that de sicariis (§ 5 supr.) The offence is defined in Dig. 48. 10. 23 'falsum videtur id esse, si quis alienum chirographum imitetur, aut libellum vel rationes intercidat vel describat, non qui alias... mentiuntur.' In the collatio legum Mos. et Rom. (viii. 7) Ulpian speaks of a senatusconsult made when Statilius and Taurus were consuls, which dealt with forgeries of documents other than wills, to which, as is clear from its name, the lex Cornelia principally related. The punishment of freemen for forgery seems to have varied much with their rank and the enormity of the offence, 'honestiores . . . in insulam deportantur... humiliores aut in metallum damnantur, aut in crucem tolluntur' Paul. sent. rec. 5. 25. 1, 'pro modo delicti aut relegantur aut capite puniuntur' ib. 13, 'capitali supplicio, si id exigat magnitudo commissi, vel deportatione... imminente' Cod. 9. 22. 22.

§ 8. The same distinction between armed and unarmed violence was drawn by the praetor in interdict law; see on Tit. 16. 6 supr. Between the enactment of the lex Iulia and Justinian's time the penalty for vis armata seems often to have been death (Paul. sent. rec. 5. 26. 1, Cod. Theod. 9. 10. 1), which, however, was but seldom inflicted in the latter's time, Cod. 9. 12. 7 and 8, Dig. 48. 6. 10. 2. Sanctimonialis is explained by Augustine, Serm. 23 'propria et excellentiori sanctitate virgines, quae in ecclesia nominantur, quas . . . usitatiore vocabulo sanctimoniales appellare consuevimus:' cf. Cod. 1. 3. 54 'virginum vel viduarum vel diaconissarum, quae Deo fuerint dedicatae.'

§ 8. The full title of this statute was 'lex Iulia peculatus et de sacrilegis

Rr

religiosam furati fuerint. sed si quidem ipsi iudices tempore administrationis publicas pecunias subtraxerunt, capitali animadversione puniuntur, et non solum hi, sed etiam qui ministerium eis ad hoc adhibuerunt vel qui subtracta ab his scientes susceperunt: alii vero, qui in hanc legem inciderint, 10 poenae deportationis subiugentur. Est inter publica iudicia lex Fabia de plagiariis, quae interdum capitis poenam ex 11 sacris constitutionibus irrogat, interdum leviorem. Sunt praeterea publica iudicia lex Iulia ambitus et lex Iulia repetundarum et lex Iulia de annona et lex Iulia de residuis, quae de certis capitulis loquuntur et animae quidem amissionem non irrogant, aliis autem poenis eos subiciunt, qui praecepta earum neglexerint.

et de residuis' (for the last see § 11 inf.), Dig. 48. 13. Whether the unlawful appropriation of municipal property came within the penalties of peculatus was at first uncertain, but the question was decided in the affirmative by Trajan, Dig. 48. 13. 4. 7. For the meaning of religiosus see Bk. ii. 1. 9 and note, supr.; stealing from tombs, however, does not seem to have amounted to sacrilege, 'lapidem hunc movere... proximum sacrilegio maiores habuerunt' Cod. 9. 19. 5, 'sunt sacrilegi, qui publica sacra compilaverunt, at qui privata sacra... amplius quam fures, minus quam sacrilegi merentur' Dig. 48. 13. 9. I.

The penalty of the lex Iulia peculatus was aquae et ignis interdictio, for which deportatio was substituted, Dig. 48. 13. 3. p. 134 supr.; but sacrilegi were punished variously according to the enormity of their crime, Dig. ib. 9. pr. A fine of four times the value of the property appropriated seems to have been commonly inflicted for peculatus, perhaps under the lex Iulia itself, Paul. sent. rec. 5. 27. Peculation by judges was at first punished only by fine, for which death was substituted by Theodosius, 'cum vix par poena his possit flagitiis inveniri' Cod. Theod. 9. 28. 1.

§ 10. The lex Fabia de plagiariis is referred to by Cicero, pro Rabirio 3, and there is a Title upon it in the Code (9. 20); its content is described by Ulpian in the collatio, 14. 2 and 3 'lege Fabia tenetur, qui civem Romanum, eundemque, qui in Italia liberatus sit, celaverit, vinxerit, vinctumque habuerit, vendiderit, emerit, ....eiusdem legis capite secundo tenetur, qui alienum servum invito domino celaverit, vendiderit, emerit dolo malo ;' as to its penalties it is said in the same passage, 'et olim quidem huius legis poena numaria fuit, sed translata est cognitio in praefectos urbis, itemque praesidis provinciae extra ordinem meruit animadversionem : ideoque humiliores aut in metallum damnantur, aut in crucem tolluntur: honestiores, adempta dimidia parte bonorum, in perpetuum relegantur.'

§ 11. The lex Iulia de ambitu was enacted by Augustus, Suetonius,

Sed de publicis iudiciis haec exposuimus, ut vobis possibile 12 sit summo digito et quasi per indicem ea tetigisse. alioquin diligentior eorum scientia vobis ex latioribus digestorum sive pandectarum libris deo propitio adventura est.

Octav. 34 upon it Paulus says (sent. rec. 5. 30 A) 'petiturus magistratum vel provinciae sacerdotium, si turbam suffragiorum causa conduxerit, servos advocaverit, aliamve quam multitudinem conduxerit, convictus, ut vis publicae reus, in insulam deportatur ;' in Dig. 48. 14. 1. I the ordinary penalty is said to have been a fine of 100 aurei.

The taking of bribes by judges and magistrates (repetundae) had been punished with death by the Twelve Tables, 'iudicem arbitrumve . . . qui ob rem dicendam pecuniam accepisse convictus est, capite punit' Gell. 20. 1. 7; a quaestio perpetua for the trial of this offence was established by a lex Calpurnia, Cic. Bruto 27. The ordinary penalty was a fine of four times the bribe taken, Cod. 9. 27. 1 and 6, but in graver cases we read of relegatio, deportatio, and even death, Paul. sent. rec. 5. 28, Dig. 48. 11. 7. 3.

Upon the lex Iulia relating to repetundae Paulus says, 'iudices pedanei, si pecunia corrupti dicantur, plerumque a praeside aut curia submoventur, aut in exsilium mittuntur, aut ad tempus relegantur' sent. rec. 5. 28.

'Lege Iulia de annona poena statuitur adversus eum, qui contra annonam fecerit societatemve coierit quo annona carior fiat. Eadem lege continetur, ne quis navem nautamve retineat, aut dolo malo faciat, quo magis detineatur, et poena viginti aureorum statuitur' Dig. 48. 12. 2. Other penalties for the same offence were exclusion from the corn trade, relegatio, and condemnation to public works, Dig. 47. 11. 6. pr.

The lex Iulia de residuis was part of the larger statute noticed in § 9 supr. The offence was that of converting to one's own use public money entrusted to one for a specific public purpose, 'lege Iulia de residuis tenetur, qui publicam pecuniam delegatam in usum aliquem retinuit neque in eum consumsit' Dig. 48. 13. 2. The penalty was a fine amounting to a third of the money so converted; of course the principal sum had to be restored as well, Dig. ib. 4. 5.

EXCURSUS X.

ON THE EARLIER HISTORY OF ROMAN CIVIL

PROCEDURE.

A favourite subject of speculation with the political philosophers of the 17th and 18th centuries was the social condition of man in the remote ages anterior to his union with his fellows in the organization called the state, and the process by which this latter first came into existence, with all its paraphernalia of legislatures, judicial institutions, and political subordination. Upon the latter question they agreed, in the main, in holding the theory known as that of the Social Compact,' though their respective political prejudices led them to differ largely as to the actual form of government in which the Compact historically resulted. The age was one in which a priori reasoning was in high repute, and their method was to disregard the facts of history, and to attach no importance to such knowledge of primitive societies as even they possessed: consequently, their doctrine has now been so universally discredited, that modern thinkers find in it no value except as a convenient form for the expression of moral truths. Upon the former question there was greater diversity of opinion. On the one hand man was represented as living in a golden age, of which universal peace, simplicity of manners, and freedom from the constant toil of modern society were the leading characteristics, apart from the absence of that restraint which is the inevitable accompaniment of law and political organization. On the other, his state was said to be one of internecine war with all around him; every man's hand was against his neighbour: the strong man armed alone was secure of life and property, and that only so long as no one stronger than himself appeared to try conclusions with

him.

Though the latter of these theories is no less pure speculation than the former, it cannot be denied that it is largely supported by the actual evidence afforded us by primitive societies. As by the fossils which he finds at different depths beneath the earth's surface the