XIII. rioters was Kæso Quinctius 15, the son of the famous CHAP. L. Quinctius Cincinnatus; and he made himself so conspicuous, that A. Virginius, one of the tribunes, impeached him before the assembly of the tribes, and named a day on which he was to appear to answer to the charge. lian law, on impeach grounded. This is the fifth instance of impeachment by the of the Icitribunes, which we have met with in the course of which his fifteen years, besides the famous case of Coriolanus. ment was The right in the present case was grounded on the Icilian law, brought forward by a tribune, Sp. Icilius, which I have not noticed before, because the time at which it passed is doubted. Dionysius, who alone mentions it, places 16 it as early as the year 262, in the year after the first appointment of the tribunes; while Niebuhr thinks that it could not have been earlier than the year 284, and that it was one of the consequences of the success of the Publilian laws. It established the important point, that if any burgher interrupted a tribune when speaking to the commons in their own assembly, the tribune might impeach him before the commons, and might require him to give sureties to such an amount as the accuser should think proper; if he refused to give security, he was to be put to death and his property confiscated; if he demurred to the amount of the sum required, this question also was to be tried by the commons. The great object in this law was to assert the jurisdiction of the commons over a bur 15 Livy, III. 11. Dionysius, X. 16 Dionysius, VII. 17. 4, 5. XIII. CHAP. gher; hence the severity of the punishment if the accused refused to give the required security; he was then to be put to death as an open enemy; but if he complied, and appeared to answer to the charge, the ordinary sentence for a mere interruption of the business of the assembly of the tribes would probably be no more than a fine; and this seems to have caused the confusion of Dionysius' statement, for he represents the sureties as required, not for the accused person's appearance at his trial, but for his payment of such a fine as the tribunes might impose, as if the sentence could in no case exceed a fine. Whereas the case of Appius Claudius, as well as that of Kæso, prove the contrary; and of Kæso, Livy says " expressly that the tribune impeached him for a capital offence, before the alleged charge of murder was brought against him. In fact, where there is no fixed criminal law, awarding certain punishments for certain offences, the relation of judge implies a power of deciding not only as to the guilt or innocence of the prisoner, but also as to the degree of his guilt, and the nature of the punishment to be inflicted. And much more would this be the case when the judgment was exercised, not by an individual magistrate, but by the sovereign society itself. Kæso goes into exile before his trial. According to the Icilian law, the tribune called upon Kæso Quinctius to give sureties for his appearance, and the amount of the security required was heavy; he was to find ten sureties 18 at three thou 17" A. Virginius Kæsoni capi- 18 Livy, III. 13. tis diem dicit." III. 11. sand asses each. But in the mean time a witness, M. Volscius Fictor, who had been tribune some years before, came forward to charge Kæso with another and a totally distinct crime. "During the time of the plague," he said, "he and his brother, a man advanced in years, and not completely recovered from an attack of the pestilence, had fallen in with Kaso and a party of his club in all the licence of riot in the Suburra. An affray had followed, and his brother had been knocked down by Kæso: the old man had been carried home, and died, as he thought, from the injury; but the consuls had every year refused to listen to his complaint, and try the offender." Outrages of this sort on the part of the young aristocracy were common even at Athens 19; in aristocratical states they must have been far more frequent; and in all ordinary cases there is a sympathy with youth and birth, even amongst the people themselves, which is against any severe dealing with such excesses. But Kæso's offence was gross, and seemed to belong to his general character; the commons were indignant to the highest degree at this new crime, and could scarcely be prevented from tearing the offender to pieces. Even the tribune thought that no money security was sufficient when the charge was so serious; the body of the accused must be kept safe in prison that he might abide the sentence of the law. But some of the other tribunes were 19 See the well-known speech of Demosthenes against Midias, and also the speech against Conon. See too the stories told in Plu- СНАР, XIII. XIII. CHAP. prevailed on by the powerful friends of the criminal to extend to him their protection; they forbade the attachment of his person. Being thus left at large, he withdrew from justice, and fled across the Tiber into Etruria before his trial came on 20. His relations, by whose influence justice had been thus defrauded, paid the poor compensation of their forfeited bail; and even here the punishment would not fall on the guilty, for when a burgher was fined, his clients were bound to contribute to discharge it for him. Conspiracy to effect his return. Kæso's flight provoked his associates to dare the last extremities. From mere rioters they became conspirators; and they played their game deeply. Still continuing their riots whenever the assembly of the tribes met, but taking care that no one of their body should be especially conspicuous, they on all other occasions " endeavoured to make themselves popular: they would speak civilly to the commons, would talk with them, and ask them to their houses, well knowing how readily the poor and the humble are won by a little attention and liberality on the part of the rich and noble. Meanwhile, a darker plot was in agitation: Kæso held frequent communication with them; he had joined himself to a band of exiles and runaway slaves from various quarters, such as abounded in Italy then no less than in the middle ages: with this aid he would surprise the Capitol by night, his associates would rise and massacre the tribunes and the most obnoxious of the 20 Livy, III. 13. 21 Livy, III. 14. XIII. commons, and thus the old ascendancy of the bur- CHAP. ghers would be restored, such as it had been before the fatal concessions made at the Sacred Hill. exiles and prise the night; but ed the next are cut to Such was the information which the tribunes, ac- A party of cording to Dionysius 22, laid before the senate, soon slaves surafter Kæso's flight from Rome. From what annalist Capitol by he copied this statement does not appear; but Livy, it is recoverwho has followed some author far more partial day, and the party who to the Quinctian family, makes no mention of it, had seized it although it is really essential to the right understand- pieces. ing of his own subsequent narrative. For in the next year, according to the account of both Livy and Dionysius 23, the Capitol was surprised by night by a body of slaves and exiles, and the leader of the party made it his first demand that all Roman exiles should be restored to their country. The burghers had great difficulty in persuading the commons to take up arms; till at last the consul P. Valerius prevailed with them, and relying on his word that he would not only allow the tribunes to hold their assembly for the consideration of the Terentilian law, but would do his best to induce the senate and the curia to give their consent to it, the commons followed him to the assault of the Capitol. He himself was killed in the onset; but the Capitol was carried, and all its defenders either slain on the spot, or afterwards executed. The leader of this desperate band is said to been a Sabine, Appius Herdonius; and in the have Kaso's share story prise not 22 Dionysius, X. 10, 11. 23 Livy, III. 15. Dionysius, X. 14—16. in the enter openly acknowledged. |