reckoned. As sodalicius is an adjective 131, the full title is collegia sodalicia, as it appears in inscriptions and in the Digests 132 They were really a revival of the sodalitates in another form. In so far as they were associations of members of tribes for the pursuit of a definite object, they were collegia. But as they resembled the original sodalitates in the support which their members afforded to each other in the courts of justice, in popular assemblies and at elections, these collegia were sodalicia. Thus they were political clubs within the tribus, founded often by the candidates themselves, as by P. Clodius in B. C. 58. Their principal, if not their only, aim was to organise and retain in their own hands a system of bribery133, so as, if possible, to divert any charge of ambitus from the candidates to themselves, trusting to their numbers to afford them security. So the old evil reappeared in a new form. Hence such a collegium is called 134 a consensio quae magis honeste quam vere sodalitas nominatur, because it is not really a sodalitas in the primary sense of the word. But since each member of a collegium sodalicium may be also spoken of as a sodalis, we find Cicero in § 46 saying cupidos et gratiosos—tu si sodalis vocas, officiosam amicitiam nomine inquinas criminoso.

§ 24. The crimen sodalicii, therefore, which formed the acte d'accusation of Gnaeus Plancius, was for the organisation of clubs in order to exercise undue influence over the elections 135. But Laterensis, in order to gain his cause, must prove, which he failed to do, these facts :-Plancium decuriasse, conscripsisse, sequestrem fuisse, pronunciasse, divisisse, that he had planned a decuriatio tribulium and a discriptio populi.

131 Cornific. ad Herenn. IV § 64 uses sodalicium in reference to convivium: venit in aedes quasdam in quibus sodalicium erat futurum.

132 Th. Mommsen de collegiis P. 32.

133 Hence M. Licinius Crassus, as author of the lex de soda

liciis, is called harum ipsarum legum ambitus auctor or. p. Planc. § 49. The plural leges is used of one law in reference to its different chapters.

134 or. p. Planc. § 37.

135 The modus operandi may be gathered from this speech § 44— $ 47: cf. § 37, § 39.

Those who wished to enter such a club and bind themselves to its objects, had to give in their names to the president (magister collegii), who might, as its founder, himself be the candidate for office. They were then enrolled (conscripti) and made members collegii sodalicii, subsequently subdivided into bands of ten (decuriati), each of which was presided over by a decurio 136. The object of this subdivision was that the whole body might be more easily controlled. What was done for a candidate in his own tribus could be done for him by his friends in the remaining tribes 137. Cicero himself speaks of activity among the sodalicia as discriptio populi, by which he could only mean the organisation of the people outside the candidate's tribus through the agency of other clubs.

$25. It was against such combinations as these that the lex Licinia de sodaliciis was directed, which was passed in B.C. 55, in the consulate (second) of Pompeius Magnus and M. Licinius Crassus Dives. Its object was not so much to pass a severer sentence on corrupt practices in electionsthe legal enactments against ambitus were sufficient for that purpose as to prevent the formation of societies, which combined to make gain out of political questions, and, if necessary, to proceed to acts of violence. It applied therefore not only to those who obtained office by the help of clubs but also to persons out of office, if they had organised clubs and used them for the promotion of any political schemes.

So, when M. J. Laterensis accused Gnaeus Plancius under the lex Licinia de sodaliciis and yet could only bring forward charges of ordinary ambitus, his object in so doing was to put in force every form of severity that the law admitted, among which may be mentioned the rule that even persons absent on the public service were obliged to put in an appearance, just as in causae de vi138, and to procure the infliction of

136 or. p. Sest. § 34, or. in Pis. SII, § 23, or. p. dom. § 12, post red. in S. § 33, Liv. XXII 38, 3.

157 The Schol. Bob. refers to this in his remark; ut...sibi mu

tuo eadem suffragationis emptae praesidia communicarent.

138 A. W. Zumpt: Criminalrecht der Röm. Rep. II 2 p. 402.

the punishment already applicable to cases of vis: and also in order that he might bring the defendant before an extraordinary tribunal, the iudices editicii—a court employed only in cases of res tribuaria, and which could not take cognizance of any other, even of ambitus. And when then, in spite of this, Cicero speaks of M. Licinius Crassus as harum ipsarum legum ambitus auctor i.e. as the author of these decrees against ambitus 139, he cannot mean any kind of ambitus but that practised by such sodales and sequestres.

§ 26. For the lex Licinia de sodaliciis expressly forbade, as is shown by the above passages, the association of sodales, the formation and organisation of clubs in pursuit of political ends; it forbade canvassing and registering (conscribere) men in the several tribes and subdividing those who belonged to the same tribus into bodies of ten (decuriare), and in like manner marking out the several tribes into districts (populum discribere); it forbade the employment of sequestres or intermediaries for holding deposit-money, the promising of money (pronuntiare), the doling it out (dividere) and the sale to others of votes obtained by bribery 140.

According to Cicero not one of these offences could be proved against Plancius. He had, it is true, like all candidates, canvassed the people by tribes (tributim) 141, but that was no offence against law. He had, it is true, his friends, but to designate those by the name of sodales would be to slander a pure and honourable friendship 142. He was, it is true, popular and influential, but that was no reason why he should be suspected of electioneering intrigues. If others had worked by means of clubs in the interest of Plancius, it was they, not Plancius, who should be impeached.

g. On the constitution of the Court

§ 27. The law provided that for the trial of such cases the court should be composed of iudices editicii. There was no

139 § 49.

140

or. p. Planc. § 38 venditorem, corruptorem, sequestrem esse.

141

§ 24 1. 20. 142 § 46.

jury (iudices) so constituted for other actions: Sulpicius had proposed that there should be for those of ambitus, but it had been decided against him in B. C. 63.

At the time of the trial of Plancius in B. C. 54 the arrangement introduced by the lex Aurelia of Lucius Aurelius Cotta in B. C. 70 was in force, according to which the juries were to consist of three decuriae, taken in equal numbers from the three orders, the senators, the equites and the tribuni aerarii 143. Up to the year B. C. 123 the iudices, whether single jurymen or a number of jurymen empanelled to serve either on the standing or special commissions (quaestiones perpetuae or extraordinariae), were taken exclusively from the Senate. In that year the lex Sempronia iudiciaria of Gaius Gracchus was passed which transferred the iudicia, i.e. the right of acting as jurors on criminal trials, from the Senate to those possessed of the census equester, who thenceforward constituted the ordo equester 144. The iudicia remained in their hands for forty-two years, until Sulla in B. C. 81 gave them back to the senate. But the reaction consequent upon the death of the Dictator rendered the continuance of this arrangement impossible, accordingly in B. C. 70 the law of L. Aurelius Cotta, one of the praetors of that year, was passed, which ordained that the iudices should be selected from the three orders, each order forming a decuria. As the quaestiones perpetuae gradually came to embrace all criminal causes, a certain number of iudices were selected by the Praetor Urbanus for the whole and distributed among the different quaestiones. The list for the year was termed album iudicum, and the jurors were technically designated iudices selecti145. They amounted in all from about 3 × 350=1050 to 3 × 400=1200.

143 Ramsay, Rom. Ant. p. 293. 144 Vell. Paterc. II 6, 13, 32, Tac. Ann. XII 60 cum Semproniis rogationibus equester ordo in possessione iudiciorum locaretur. The lex Sempronia was followed by the lex Servilia repetundarum

of Gaius Servilius Glaucia, by which its provisions were rendered more stringent.

145 fragm. leg. Serv. 6, 7: or. p. Cluent. § 121, Dio. Cass. XXXIX 7. Cf. Hor. Sat. I 4, 123 unum ex iudicibus selectis obiciebat,

§ 28. In the period between the lex Cornelia of B. C. 81, when the iudicia were confined exclusively to the Senate, and the lex Aurelia of B. C. 70 we hear also of decuriae iudicum 146. We do not know for certain upon what principle this arrangement was founded, but it has been conjectured that the whole body of iudices was then divided into sections called decuriae, possibly ten in number, each having from 35 to 40 members, and that the decuriae were called upon to serve in turn or that particular decuriae were assigned to particular courts 147. The list of iudices varied from year to year, and each decuria, after the exclusion of those who were legally disqualified, was further reduced by lot to 15, which number constituted a collegium iudicum. If there were any vacancies to be supplied in the consilium, caused by the challenger, they were filled up by a process technically termed subsortitio, because the presiding judge drew fresh names from the urn. The same regulations seem to have applied after the passing of the lex Aurelia to the other two bodies admitted by it, viz. the equites and the acrarii tribuni. Each of these orders also was divided into ten decuriae of 35-40, the series from 1-10 was determined by lot, and the appointment of the decuriae composed of the three estates to try the several lawsuits was made by the Praetor Urbanus. Thus about 120 iudices, including those excused from serving, were

Ovid. Am. I 10, 37 non bene selecti iudicis arca patet, Trist. II 132 non mea selecto iudice iussa fugast, or. p. Cluent. § 121 praetores urbani, qui iurati debent optimum quemque in selectos iudices referre. The term iudices delecti was applied to those appointed from among the selecti to try any particular cause.

146 or. in Verr. II 1 § 158 eiusmodi subsortitionem homo amentissimus suorum quoque iudicum fore putavit per sodalem suum, Q. Curtium, iudicem quaestionis suae: cui ego nisi vi populi et hominum clamore atque convitio