petit. Negamus deberi. Judicium fiat statim: non recusamus. Numquid praeterea? Si veretur ut res judicio facto parata sit, judicatum solvi satis accipiat. Quibus a me verbis satis accipiet, iisdem ipse quod peto satisdet. Actum jam potest esse, C. Aquilli : jam tu potes discedere liberatus molestia, prope dicam, non minore quam Quintius. Quid agimus, Hortensi? quid de hac conditione dicimus? Possumus aliquando depositis armis sine periculo fortunarum de re pecuniaria disceptare? possumus ita rem nostram persequi ut hominis propinqui caput incolume esse patiamur? possumus petitoris personam capere, accusatoris deponere? Immo, inquit, abs te satis accipiam: ego autem tibi non satisdabo. XIV. Quis tandem nobis ista jura tam aequa describit? quis hoc statuit, quod aequum sit in Quintium, id iniquum esse in Naevium? Quintii bona, inquit, ex edicto praetoris possessa sunt. Ergo id ut confitear postulas, ut, quod numquam factum esse judicio defendimus, id proinde quasi factum sit nostro judicio confirmemus. Inveniri ratio, C. Aquilli, non potest ut ad suum quisque quan primum sine cujusquam dedecore, infamia pernicieque perveniat ? Profecto si quid deberetur peteret; non omnia judicia fieri mallet quam unum illud unde haec omnia nascuntur. Qui inter tot annos ne appellarit quidem Quintium, quum potestas esset agendi quotidie; qui, quo tempore primum male agere coepit, in vadimoniis

Numquid] Some MSS. have 'non quid,' which is clearly intended for 'numquid,' though it does not appear that any MSS. have numquid.' There is a reading 'ut quid,' which Klotz has; who often takes what others refuse. He should have translated this passage.-'quod peto:' this can hardly be explained; and there is little doubt that it should be si quid peto,' which has been conjectured before. See Orelli's note. I don't think that the objection to 'quod peto' is in the expression; but literally it would mean that Quintius had a demand against Naevius. But it may be right, and it may perhaps mean here the same as si quid peto,' for it seems that Cicero contended at least that Naevius might owe Quintius something, which certainly may have been the case, if they were still partners, or if the old partnership account was unsettled. See c. 23, note on 'ultro deberet.'

petitoris-accusatoris] See Vol. I. Verr. Div. c. 1. This is all oratorical, not true. The word 'persona' is explained Vol. I. Verr. ii. 2. c. 17.

14. defendimus,] This word here means 'maintain, affirm.' The word 'defendere'

is well explained by Forcellini: the primary meaning is 'to repel.' 'Judicio' is here used two ways: 'judicio defendimus,' 'we maintain in this trial:' and 'nostro judicio confirmemus,' 'confirm by our own judgment,' by the confession implied in the act of consenting to give security (satisdare). Compare c. 9, "quin secus judicaret ipse de se." Cicero's argument is very poor. Naevius did not ask Quintius to admit that his property had been taken possession of: he said that it had, and therefore that Quintius must give security. Quintius was not compelled by the Praetor to give security: he had the optio,' as Cicero calls it, the choice' of trying the question of the bonorum possessio,' which he denied; and if his case was so clear as Cicero would have us believe, why should he not be content?-proinde quasi:' 'perinde quasi,' Klotz. Keller's MSS. have 'proinde.'

unum illud] The question about the partnership, the origin of all the rest, as it

seems.

agendi-male agere] This is a play on words, quite in Cicero's taste. 'Agendi' refers to proceedings at law: 'male agere'

differendis tempus omne consumpserit; qui posteaquam vadimonium quoque missum fecerit, hunc per insidias vi de agro communi dejecerit; qui, quum de re agendi nullo recusante potestas fuisset, sponsionem de probro facere maluerit; qui, quum revocetur ad id judicium, unde haec nata sunt omnia, conditionem aequissimam repudiet; fateatur se non pecuniam, sed vitam et sanguinem petere; is non hoc palam dicit: mihi si quid deberetur peterem, atque adeo jampridem abstulissem: nihil hoc tanto negotio, nihil tam invidioso judicio, nihil tam copiosa advocatione uterer, si petendum esset: extorquendum est invito atque ingratiis: quod non debet eripiendum atque exprimendum est: de fortunis omnibus P. Quintius deturbandus est: potentes, diserti, nobiles omnes advocandi sunt: adhibenda vis est veritati: minae jactentur: pericula intendantur: formidines opponantur ut his rebus aliquando victus et perterritus ipse cedat? Quae mehercule omnia, quum qui contra pugnent video et quum illum consessum considero, adesse atque impendere videntur neque vitari ullo modo posse. Quum autem ad te, C. Aquilli, oculos animumque rettuli, quo majore conatu studioque aguntur, eo leviora infirmioraque existimo. Nihil igitur debuit, ut tu ipse praedicas.

Quid si debuisset, continuone caussa fuisset cur a praetore postulares ut bona possideres? Non opinor id quidem neque jus esse neque cuiquam expedire. Quid igitur demonstrat? Vadimonium sibi ait esse desertum. XV. Antequam doceo id factum non esse, libet mihi, C. Aquilli, ex officii ratione atque ex omnium consuetudine rem ipsam et factum simul Sex. Naevii considerare. Ad vadimonium non venerat, ut ais, is quicum tibi affinitas, societas, omnes denique caussae et necessitudines veteres intercedebant. Illicone ad praetorem ire convenit? continuone verum fuit

to his alleged fraudulent conduct.-'sponsionem de probro:' here he is again on the old subject. It was not a 'sponsio de probro,' but a sponsio' about the fact of possession. adeo: Vol. I. Divin. c. 21.

consessum] He means the advocates and friends of Naevius, who were seated together on the 'subsellia.' Compare 'a praeconum consessu' (c. 4). Consessus,' a 'sitting together,' also means any number of persons sitting together, a company or society.' "Ut primum judices consederunt, valde diffidere boni coeperunt: non enim unquam turpior in ludo talario consessus fuit" (Cic. Ad Att. i. 16).

Vadimonium-desertum] Cicero has tried to prove that Quintius owed Naevius

nothing. But if that were so, there still remained a ground for seizing his property; and this ground is, that Quintius, as Naevius alleged, had not made an appearance when he ought to have done.

15. verum] Manutius correctly explains it by aequum,' 'right,' 'just.' Cicero (Ad Att. ii. 1) says, "quid verius quam in judicium venire qui ob rem judicandam pecuniam acceperit." See Caesar, B. G. iv. 8, and Horace, Sat. ii. 3. v. 312; Ep. i. 7. v. 98. -'usu venire:' to happen,' 'to come in the way of experience of life.' • Quod haec de Vercingetorige usu ventura opinione praeceperat" (Caesar, B. G. vii. 9). Cicero (Cat. Maj. c. 3) has usu venirent;' and Terence (Phorm. 1. 2, 24), 'mi usus venit.'

66

postulare ut ex edicto bona possidere liceret? ad haec extrema et inimicissima jura tam cupide decurrebas, ut tibi nihil in posterum quod gravius atque crudelius facere posses reservares? Nam quid homini potest turpius, quid viro miserius aut acerbius usu venire? quod tantum evenire dedecus, quae tanta calamitas inveniri potest? Pecuniam si cuipiam fortuna ademit, aut si alicujus eripuit injuria, tamen, dum existimatio est integra, facile consolatur honestas egestatem. At non nemo aut ignominia affectus aut judicio turpi convictus bonis quidem suis utitur; alterius opes, id quod miserrimum est, non exspectat: hoc tamen in miseriis adjumento et solatio sublevatur. Cujus vero bona venierunt; cujus non modo illae amplissimae fortunae, sed etiam victus vestitusque necessarius sub praecone cum dedecore subjectus est; is non modo ex numero vivorum exturbatur, sed, si fieri potest, infra etiam mortuos

There is a reading 'quid vero miserius,' the reading of all Keller's MSS.; but it is a mistake.

ignominia-judicio turpi] A 'judicium turpe' is a trial in which infamia' is the consequence of an adverse judgment, as in the actions pro socio, tutelae, mandati, depositi,' as we learn from the Edict, and from Cicero (Pro Roscio Com. c. 6; Pro Roscio Amer. c. 38, 39; Pro Caecina, c. 2; Pro Cluentio, c. 42, "turpi judicio damnati in perpetuum omni honore ac dignitate privantur"). Insolvency also in all cases was followed by 'infamia,' when a man's property was taken possession of, put up to sale, sold (bona possessa, proscripta, vendita:' Tab. Heracl. lin. 113-117; Gaius ii. 154). Every thing, it appears, was sold, even to a man's clothes, those that were not necessary to cover him, we must suppose; for it is not possible that they should have sold the clothes on a man's back, or stripped his wife and children naked. The old law of bankruptcy in England was mainly directed against fraudulent bankrupts, and they were treated as criminals. In fact fraud was considered an element in the description of bankruptcy; but this is not so now. All a bankrupt's property becomes the property of his assignees for the benefit of his creditors; but the English law does not deal so hardly with him as Cicero represents the case of insolvency at Rome. But the English law makes a distinction between the insolvency of traders, who alone can have the advantage, for such it is, of being made bankrupts, and those insolvents who are not traders, and who are dealt with according to another rule. In cases of insolvency the law, releasing the

debtor from prison, secures his person from liability for debts contracted before his discharge, but all his present and future property must be disposed of for the benefit of his creditors. The wearing apparel, bedding, and other necessaries of the insolvent and his family are excepted from seizure, and the working tools and implements, not exceeding in the whole the value of 20.

Cicero (Pro Rosc. Com. c. 6) says of three actions which had infamia as their consequence, fiduciae, tutelae, societatis,' that they are " summae existimationis et paene dicam capitis.' In this oration (Pro Quintio, cc. 8, 9, 13, 22) he calls this question of the seizure of Quintius' property 'capitis caussa,' and in c. 15 he designates the consequence of a judgment against Quintius as 'infamia,' though he does not use that word in this chapter, nor in any other part of the speech; but it is a plain conclusion that if judgment was given against Quintius in this action, the result was 'infamia.' Savigny (System, &c. ii. 198) shows that "Infamia was nothing else than the loss of political rights, though citizenship was still retained. The Infamis consequently became Aerarius; he lost his vote, and the capacity of obtaining the offices of the state (suffragium et honores)." It was accordingly a 'capitis deminutio;' and is thus defined by Savigny: "The Infamis is a Roman who in consequence of a general rule (not in consequence of the censors' arbitrary pleasure) retains his Civitas, but has lost the political rights that belong to it."

ex numero vivorum] Orelli has 'ex numero virorum,' which is merely a typographical error, derived, it is said, from Beck's edition.-' etenim mors honesta, &c. :' none

amandatur. Etenim mors honesta saepe vitam quoque turpem exornat vita turpis ne morti quidem honestae locum relinquit. Ergo hercule, cujus bona ex edicto possidentur, hujus omnis fama et existimatio cum bonis simul possidetur; de quo libelli in celeberrimis locis proponuntur, huic ne perire quidem tacite obscureque conceditur; cui magistri fiunt et domini constituuntur, qui qua lege et qua conditione pereat pronuntient; de quo homine praeconis vox praedicat et pretium conficit; huic acerbissimum vivo videntique funus ducitur: si funus id habendum sit, quo non amici conveniunt ad exsequias cohonestandas, sed bonorum emptores, ut carnifices, ad reliquias vitae lacerandas et distrahendas. XVI. Itaque majores nostri raro id accidere voluerunt; praetores ut considerate fieret comparaverunt; viri boni, quum palam fraudantur, quum experiundi potestas non est, timide tamen et pedetentim istuc descendunt, vi ac necessitate coacti, inviti, multis vadimoniis desertis saepe illusi ac destituti. Considerant enim quid et quantum sit alterius bona proscribere. Jugulare civem ne jure quidem quisquam bonus vult: mavult enim commemorare se, quum posset perdere, pepercisse, quam quum parcere potuerit perdidisse. Haec in homines alienissimos, denique inimicissimos viri boni faciunt et hominum existimationis et communis humanitatis caussa; ut, quum ipsi nihil alteri scientes incommodarint, nihil ipsis jure incommodi cadere possit. Ad vadimonium non venit. Quis? Propinquus. Si res ista gravissima sua sponte videretur, tamen ejus atrocitas necessitudinis nomine levaretur. Ad vadimonium non venit. Quis? Socius. Etiam gravius aliquid

of the critics are satisfied with this passage, and each has his emendation to propose. Klotz inserts'non,' and writes' vitam quoque non turpem exornat,' which Keller would prefer to any of the emendations, if we are to have one. It is however one of the worst, and is pure nonsense. There is no difficulty in seeing what Cicero says. Whether it is said well or ill, is another matter. I suppose that he could talk and write a little idly sometimes, like other people; particularly when he was a young man.

magistri] The 'magister' is one of the creditors who has the management of the sale of the insolvent's property. The word 'domini' means, I suppose, that the creditors exercise the dominium over the property, they sell as owners, though they are not owners. "Una agebant ceteri creditores in quibus erat Lucullus et P. Scipio et is quem putabant magistrum fore si bona

venirent, L. Pontius" (Cic. Ad Attic. i. 1). As to the title which the purchaser acquired at an auction made under legal process, see Gaius (iii. § 80; iv. § 35). He only got the Bonitarian ownership or equitable title. He got his legal title by usucapio.'

16. experiundi, &c.] When they cannot proceed against him in the usual form (in jus vocare), because he is hiding himself. In jus vocare est juris experiundi caussa vocare' (Paulus, Dig. 2. 4. 1).

Quis? Socius.] Here he calls them partners; but the words which follow make it doubtful, if he considered them as partners only because Naevius and C. Quintius had been partners, which circumstance alone did not make P. Quintius and Naevius partners; or partners in consequence of their having acted and dealt as partners after the death of C. Quintius. All through this oration the facts are left in a perplexed

ei deberes concedere, quicum te aut voluntas congregasset aut fortuna conjunxisset. Ad vadimonium non venit. Quis? Is qui tibi praesto semper fuit. Ergo in eum, qui semel hoc commisit ut tibi praesto non esset, omnia tela conjecisti, quae parata sunt in eos qui permulta male agendi caussa fraudandique fecerunt? Si dupondius tuus ageretur, Sex. Naevi, si in parvula re captionis aliquid vererere, non statim ad C. Aquillium aut ad eorum aliquem qui consuluntur concurrisses? Quum jus amicitiae, societatis, affinitatis ageretur; quum officii rationem atque existimationis duci conveniret; eo tempore tu non modo ad C. Aquillium aut L. Lucilium, sed ne ipse quidem ad te rettulisti; ne haec quidem tecum locutus es? Horae duae fuerunt; Quintius ad vadimonium non venit. Quid ago? Si mehercule haec tecum duo verba fecisses: Quid ago? respirasset cupiditas atque avaritia paullulum: aliquid loci rationi et consilio dedisses: tu te collegisses: non in eam turpitudinem venisses ut hoc tibi esset apud tales viros confitendum, qua tibi vadimonium non sit obitum, eadem te hora consilium cepisse hominis propinqui fortunas funditus evertere. XVII. Ego pro te nunc hos consulo, post tempus et in aliena re, quoniam tu in tua re quum tempus erat consulere oblitus es. Quaero abs te, C. Aquilli, L. Lucili, P. Quintili, M. Marcelle; vadimonium mihi

state; and probably purposely. Cicero calls P. Quintius socius,' in order to use it for his argument here.

Si dupondius tuus] This is the true reading. The old reading was 'si de praediis tuis.' If a 'dupondius,' a couple of ases, were in danger, Naevius would have applied for advice to C. Aquillius or some other juriconsultus (qui consuluntur). 'Captionis aliquid' is any loss, a meaning which seems to be connected with the meaning of 'captus' in such expressions as 'mente captus.'

omitted. See Vol. I. Excursus on 'Non modo.'

This passage stands thus in Orelli: "non modo non ad C. Aquillium aut ad L. Lucilium rettulisti, sed ne ipse quidem te consuluisti ;" which reading is derived from Peyron's Turin Palimpsest, and is perhaps the best. See Orelli's note; but I have let it stand as it is in the Variorum edition; for it is very possible that 'consuluisti' is an interpretation of 'rettulisti,' as Gruter supposed; and the words sed ne ipse quidem te consuluisti' are not in all the MSS. Klotz, in his Preface (p. 60) contends that the Palimpsest is right, that non modo non is the true reading; as appropriate, he says, as his own reading, 'vitam quoque non turpem,' in another passage.

Quid ago?] A familiar expression when a man asks for advice, or as in this passage, when he deliberates. "Videtis quo in loco res sit; quid ago? dic, Hegio" (Terence, Phorm. ii. 4. 6).

L. Lucilium] Orelli has L. Lucilium.' The name is L. Lucullum in some MSS. and editions. Lucilius was a jurisconsultus and one of the teachers of Ser. Sulpicius. L. Lucullus was not a jurisconsultus. We may infer from Cicero (Brutus, c. 42) that Lucilius is the true name, for he mentions Lucilius and Gallus together: "cumque discendi caussa duobus peritissimis operam dedisset, L. Lucilio Balbo et C. Aquillio Gallo." Orelli has non modo non,' which is followed by ne quidem.' Keller rightly observes that Beck, who edited non modo' without the non,' was supported by the usage of the Latin writers rather than 17. vadimonium non obiit] This use of by the MSS. But the 'non' ought to be obire' is like many others, where there is a

consilium—evertere.] This is not the only instance in Cicero of consilium' followed by an infinitive. Hotmann quotes two other examples.