<GetPassage xmlns:tei="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns="http://chs.harvard.edu/xmlns/cts">
            <request>
                <requestName>GetPassage</requestName>
                <requestUrn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi005.perseus-eng2:2.3.141-2.3.160</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi005.perseus-eng2:2.3.141-2.3.160</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" xml:lang="eng" n="urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi005.perseus-eng2"><div type="textpart" subtype="actio" n="2"><div type="textpart" subtype="book" n="3"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="141" resp="perseus"><p> What difference did it make, O most audacious man, whether you made this decree,
                or whether you yourself made that profession and declaration concerning yourself
                which Apronius was in the habit of making? The man whom, if there had been shame,
                yes, if there had even been any fear in you, you ought not to have let go without
                punishment, you could not allow to come off without a reward. You might see the
                truth in every case, O judges, from this single affair of Scandilius. First of all,
                that this charge about the partnership in the tenths was not cooked up at <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName>, was not invented by the accuser; it was not
                (as we are accustomed sometimes to say in making a defence for a man) a domestic or
                back-stairs accusation; it was not originated in a time of your danger, but it was
                an old charge, bruited about long ago, when you were praetor, not made up at
                  <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName> by your enemies, but brought to
                  <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName> from the province. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="142" resp="perseus"><p> At the same time his great favour to Apronius may be clearly seen; also the, I
                will not say confession, but the boast of Apronius, about him. Besides all this, you
                can rake as clearly proved this first, that, in his own province, he would not
                entrust a trim in which his reputation was at stake, to any one out of his own
                retinue. <milestone n="62" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/> Is there any
                judge who has not been convinced, from the very beginning of my accusation
                respecting the collection of tenths, that he had made an attack on the property and
                fortunes of the cultivators of the soil? Who is there who did not at once decide,
                from what I then proved, that he had sold the tenths under a law quite novel, and,
                therefore, no law at all, contrary to the usage and established regulations of all
                his predecessors? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="143" resp="perseus"><p> But even if I had not such judges as I have, such impartial, such careful, such
                conscientious judges, is there any one whatever who has not long ago formed his
                opinion and his judgment from the magnitude of the injuries done, the dishonesty of
                the decrees, the iniquity of the tribunals? Even although a man may be somewhat
                careless in judging,—somewhat indifferent to the laws, to his duty to the republic,
                to our allies and friends, what then? Can even such a man doubt of the dishonesty of
                that man, when he is aware that such vast gains were made,—such iniquitous
                compromises extorted by violence and terror?—when he knows that cities were
                compelled by violence and imperious commands, by the fear of scourges and death, to
                give such great rewards, not only to Apronius and to men like him, but even to the
                slaves of Venus? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="144" resp="perseus"><p> But if any one is but little influenced by the injuries done to our allies,—if
                there be any one who is not moved by the flight, the calamities, the banishment, and
                the suicides of the cultivators of the soil; still I cannot doubt that the man who
                knows, both from the documents of the cities and the letter of Lucius Metellus, that
                  <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> has been laid waste and the farms
                deserted, must decide that it is quite impossible that any other than the severest
                judgment should be passed on that man. Will there be any one who can conceal from
                himself, or be indifferent to these facts? I have brought before you trials
                commenced respecting the partnership in the tenths, but prevented by that man from
                being brought to a decision. What is there that any one can possibly desire plainer
                than this? I have no doubt that I have satisfied you, O judges. But I will go
                further; not, indeed, in order that this may be proved more completely to your
                satisfaction than I feel sure that it already is, but that he may at last give over
                his impudence,—may cease at Last to believe that he can purchase these things which
                he himself was always ready to sell his good faith, his oath, truth, duty, and
                religion;—that his friends may cease to keep continually saying things which may be
                injury, a stain, and odium, and infamy to all of us. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="145" resp="perseus"><p> But what friends are they? Alas, the order of senators! wretched, and unpopular,
                and detested through the fault and unworthiness of a few! That Alba Aemilius,
                sitting at the entrance of the market, should say openly that Verres had gained his
                cause,—that he had bought the judges, one for four hundred thousand <foreign xml:lang="la">sesterces</foreign>, another for five, the one who who went
                cheapest, for three! And when he was answered that that was impossible; that many
                witnesses would give evidence, and besides, that I should not desert the
                cause,—“Though,” said he, “every one were to make every possible statement against
                him, still, unless the matter be brought home to him so evidently that no answer can
                be given, we have gained the cause.” </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="146" resp="perseus"><p> You say well, Alba. I will agree to your conditions. You think that conjecture
                avails nothing at a trial,—that suspicion avails nothing,—that the character of
                one's previous life avails nothing,—nor the evidence of virtuous men,—nor the
                authority or letters of cities. You demand evident proof I do not ask for judges
                like Cassius. I do not ask for the ancient impartiality of courts of justice. I do
                not, O judges, implore your good faith, your self-respect, your conscientiousness in
                giving judgment. I will take Alba for my judge; that man who is himself desirous of
                being considered an unprincipled buffoon: who by the buffoons has always been
                considered as a gladiator, rather than as a buffoon. I will bring forward such a
                case about the tenths that Alba shall confess that Verres, in the case of the corn,
                and in that of the property of the cultivators of the soil has been an open and
                undisguised robber. </p></div><milestone n="63" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="147" resp="perseus"><p> He says that he sold the tenths of the Leontine district at a high price. I showed
                at the beginning that he ought not to be considered to have sold them at a high
                price' who in name indeed sold the tenths, but who in reality and by the terms of
                the sale, and through his law, and through his edict, and through the licentiousness
                of the collectors, left no tenths at all to the cultivators of the soil. I proved
                that also, that others had sold the tenths of the Leontine district and of other
                districts also, for a high price; and that they had sold them according to the law
                of Hiero; and that they sold them for even more than you had, and that then no
                cultivator had complained. Nor indeed was there anything of which any one could
                complain, when they were sold according to a law most equitably framed; nor did it
                ever make any difference to the cultivator at what price the tenths were sold. For
                it is not the case that, if they be sold at a high price, the cultivator owes more,
                if at a low price, less. As the crops are produced, so are the tenths sold. But it
                is for the interest of the cultivator, that his crops should be such that the tenths
                may be able to be sold at as high a price as possible. As long as the cultivator
                does not give more than a tenth, it is for his interest that the tenth should be as
                large as possible. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="148" resp="perseus"><p> But, I imagine, you mean this to be the chief article of your defence, that you
                sold all the tenths at a high price, but the tenths of the Leontine district, which
                produces the most, for two hundred and sixteen thousand <foreign xml:lang="la">modii</foreign> of wheat. If I prove that you could have sold them for a good
                deal more, but that you would not knock them down to those who were bidding against
                Apronius, and that you adjudged them to Apronius for much less than you might have
                adjudged them to others;—if I prove this, will even Alba, not only your oldest
                friend, out even your lover, be able to acquit you? <milestone n="64" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/> I assert that a Roman knight, a man of the highest
                honour, Quintus Minucius, with others like himself, was willing to add to the tenths
                of the Leontine district not one thousand, not two thousand, not three thousand
                  <foreign xml:lang="la">modii</foreign> of wheat, but thirty thousand <foreign xml:lang="la">modii</foreign> of wheat to the tenths of one single district, and
                that he was not allowed to become the purchaser, that the matter might not escape
                the grasp of Apronius. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="149" resp="perseus"><p> You cannot by any means deny this, unless you are determined to deny everything.
                The business was transacted openly, in a full assembly, at <placeName key="perseus,Syracuse">Syracuse</placeName>. The whole province is the witness,
                because men are accustomed to flock together thither from all parts at the sale or
                the tenths. And whether you confess this, or whether it be proved against you, do
                you not see in what important and what evident acts you are detected. First of all,
                it is proved that that business and that booty was yours. For unless it was, why did
                you prefer that Acronius (who every one was saying was only managing your affairs in
                the matter of the tenths as your agent) should get the tenths of the Leontine
                district rather than Quintus Minucius? Secondly, that an enormous and immense profit
                was made by you. For if you would not have been influenced by thirty thousand
                  <foreign xml:lang="la">modii</foreign> of wheat, at all events Minucius would
                willingly have given thus much as a compliment to Apronius, if he had been willing
                to accept it. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="150" resp="perseus"><p> How great then must we suppose the expectation of booty which he entertained to
                have been, when he despised and scorned such vast present profit: acquired without
                the slightest trouble. Thirdly, Minucius himself would never have wished to have
                them at such a price, if you had been selling the tenths according to the Law of
                Hiero; but because he saw that by your new edicts and most iniquitous resolutions he
                should get a good deal more than tenths, on that account he advanced higher. But
                Apronius had always even a good deal more permitted to him than you had announced in
                your edict. How much gain then can we suppose was made by him to whom everything was
                permitted; when that man was so willing to add so large a compliment, who would not
                have had the same licence if he had bought the tenths? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="151" resp="perseus"><p> Lastly, unquestionably that defence, under which you have constantly thought that
                all your thefts and iniquities could be concealed, is cut from under your feet; that
                you sold the tenths at a high price—that you consulted the interest of the Roman
                people—that you provided for plenty of provisions. He cannot say this, who cannot
                deny that he sold the tenths of one district for thirty thousand <foreign xml:lang="la">modii</foreign> less than he might have done; even if I were to
                grant you this, that you did not grant them to Minucius because you had already
                adjudged them to Apronius; for they say that that is what you are in the habit of
                saying, and I am expecting to hear it, and I wish you would make that defence. But,
                even if it were so, still you cannot boast of this as a great thing, that you sold
                the tenths at a high price, when you admit that there were people who were willing
                to buy them at a much higher price. </p></div><milestone n="65" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="152" resp="perseus"><p> The avarice, then, and covetousness of this man, his wickedness, and dishonesty,
                and audacity, are proved, O judges, are proved most incontestably. What more shall I
                say What if his own friends and defenders have formed the same opinion that I have?
                What can you have more? On the arrival of Lucius Metellus the praetor, when Verres
                had made all his retinue friends of this also by that sovereign medicine of his,
                money, men applied to Metellus; Apronius was brought before him; his accuser was a
                man of the highest consideration, Caius Gallius, a senator. He demanded of Metellus
                to give him a right of action according to the terms of his edict against Apronius,
                “for having taken away property by force or by fear,” which formula of Octavius,
                Metellus had both adopted at <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName>, and now
                imported into the province. He does not succeed; as Metellus said that he did not
                wish by means of such a trial to prejudge the case of Verres himself in a matter
                affecting his condition as a free citizen. The whole retinue of Metellus, grateful
                men, stood by Apronius. Caius Gallius, a man of our order, cannot obtain from Lucius
                Metellus, his most intimate friend, a trial in accordance with his own edict. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="153" resp="perseus"><p> I do not blame Metellus; he spared a friend of his—a connection, indeed, as I have
                heard him say himself. I do not, I say, blame Metellus; but I do marvel how he not
                only prejudged the case of a man concerning whom he was unwilling that any previous
                decision should take place by means of judges, but even judged most severely and
                harshly respecting him. For, in the first place, if he thought that Apronius would
                be acquitted, there was no reason for his fearing any previous decision. In the
                second place, if Apronius were condemned, all men were likely to think that the
                cause of Verres was involved in his; this at all events Metellus did now decide, and
                he determined that their affairs and their causes were identical, since he
                determined that, if Apronius were condemned, it would be a prejudging of the case of
                Verres. And one fact is at the same time a proof of two things; both that the
                cultivators gave much more than they owed to Apronius because they were constrained
                by violence and fear; and also, that Apronius was transacting Verres's business in
                his own name, since Lucius Metellus determined that Apronius could not be condemned
                without giving a decision at the same time respecting the wickedness and dishonesty
                of Verres. </p></div><milestone n="66" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="154" resp="perseus"><p> I come now to the letter of Timarchides, his freedman and attendant; and when I
                have spoken of that, I shall have finished the whole of my charge respecting the
                truth This is the letter, O judges, which we found at <placeName key="perseus,Syracuse">Syracuse</placeName>, in the house of Apronius, where we
                were looking for letters. It was sent, as it proves itself, on the journey, when
                Verres had already departed from the province; written by the hand of Timarchides
                Read the letter of Timarchides: “Timarchides, the officer of Verres, wishes health
                to Apronius.” Now I do not blame this which he has written, “The officer.” <note anchored="true">The Latin is <foreign xml:lang="la">accensus</foreign>. “The
                    <foreign xml:lang="la">accensus</foreign> was a public officer who attended on
                  several of the Roman magistrates. He anciently preceded the consul, who had not
                  the fasces.... It was his duty to summon the people to the assemblies, and those
                  who had law-suits to court; and also, by command of the consul and praetor, to
                  proclaim the time, when it was the third hour, the sixth, &amp;c. <foreign xml:lang="la">Accensi</foreign> also attended on the governors of provinces, and
                  were commonly freedmen of the magistrate on whom they attended.”—Smith, Dict. Ant.
                  in voce.</note> For why should clerks alone assume to themselves this privilege?
                “Lucius Papirius the clerk,” I should like this signature to be common to all
                attendants, lictors, and messengers. <note anchored="true">The Latin is <foreign xml:lang="la">viator</foreign>. “<foreign xml:lang="la">Viator</foreign> was a
                  servant who attended upon and executed the commands of certain Roman magistrates,
                  to whom he bore the same relation that the lictor did to other magistrates. The
                  name <foreign xml:lang="la">viator</foreign> was derived from the circumstance of
                  their being chiefly employed in messages, either to call upon senators to attend
                  the meeting of the senate, or to summon people to the comitia.”—Smith, Dict. Ant.
                  in voce.</note> “Be sure and be very diligent in everything which concerns the
                praetor's character.” He recommends Verres to Apronius, and exhorts him to resist
                his enemies; Your reputation is protected by a very efficient guard, if indeed it
                depends on the diligence and authority of Apronius. “You have virtue and eloquence.”
              </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="155" resp="perseus"><p> How abundantly Apronius is praised by Timarchides! How splendidly! Whom ought I to
                expect to be otherwise than pleased with that man who is so highly approved by
                Timarchides? “You have ample funds.” It is quite inevitable that what there was
                superfluous of the gain you both made by the corn, must have gone chiefly to the man
                by whose intervention you transacted that business. “Get hold of the new clerks and
                officers. <note anchored="true">The Latin is <foreign xml:lang="la">apparitor</foreign>, which was “the general name for the public servants of the
                  magistrates at <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName>,—<foreign xml:lang="la">accensi</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="la">carnifex</foreign>,
                    <foreign xml:lang="la">lictores</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="la">scribae</foreign>, &amp;c. &amp;c. They were called <foreign xml:lang="la">apparitores</foreign> because they were at hand to execute the commands of the
                  magistrates. Their service or attendance was called <foreign xml:lang="la">apparitio</foreign>.”—Smith, Dict. Ant. in voce.</note> —Use every means that
                offer, in concert with Lucius Vulteius, who has the greatest influence.” See now,
                what an opinion Timarchides has of his own dishonest cunning, when he gives precepts
                of dishonesty to Apronius! Now these words, “Use every means in your power ” <note anchored="true">The Latin is <foreign xml:lang="la">caede</foreign>, <foreign xml:lang="la">concide</foreign>. “N.B. <foreign xml:lang="la">caede</foreign>
                  <foreign xml:lang="la">concide</foreign>, Cic. proverbially; i.e. use every means
                  in your power "—Riddle's Lat. Dict. in <foreign xml:lang="la">Concido</foreign>.</note> —Does not he seem to be drawing words out of his
                master's house, suited to every sort of iniquity? “I beg, my brother, that you will
                trust your own little brother,” your comrade, indeed, in gain and robbery, your
                twin-brother and image in worthlessness, dishonesty, and audacity. <milestone n="67" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/> “You will be considered dear to the
                retinue.” What does this mean, “to the retinue?” What has that to do with it? Are
                you teaching Apronius? What? had he come into this retinue at your prompting, or of
                his own accord? “Whatever is needful for each man, that employ.” How great, do you
                suppose, must have been the impudence of that man when in power, who even after his
                departure is so shameless? He says that everything can be done by money: you must
                give, waste, and spend, if you wish to gain your cause. Even this, that Timarchides
                should give this advice to Apronius, is not so offensive to me, as the fact of his
                also giving it to his patron: “When you press a request, all men gain their
                objects.” </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="156" resp="perseus"><p> Yes, while Verres was praetor, not while Sacerdos was, or Peducaeus, or this very
                Lucius Metellus. “You know that Metellus is a wise man.” But this is really
                intolerable, that the abilities of that most excellent man, Lucius Metellus, should
                be laughed at, and despised and scorned by that runaway slave Timarchides. “If you
                have Vulteius with you, everything will be mere child's play to you.” Here
                Timarchides is greatly mistaken, in thinking either that Vulteius can be corrupted
                by money, or that Metellus is going to discharge the duties of his praetorship
                according to the will of any one man; but he is mistaken by forming his conjectures
                from his own experience. Because he saw that, through his own intervention and that
                of others, many men had been able to do whatever they pleased with Verres, without
                meeting with any difficulty, he thought that there were the same means of access to
                every one. You did very easily whatever you wanted with Verres, and found it as easy
                as child's play to do so, because you knew many of the kinds of play in which he
                indulged. “Metellus and Vulteius have been impressed with the idea that you have
                ruined the cultivators of the soil.” Who attributed the action to Apronius, when he
                had ruined any cultivator? or to Timarchides when he had taken money for assigning a
                trial, or making a decree, or giving any order, or remitting any thing? or to Sextus
                the lictor, when he, as executioner, had put an innocent man to death? No one. Every
                body at the time attributed these things to Verres; whom they desire now to see
                condemned. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="157" resp="perseus"><p> “People have dinned into their ears, that you were a partner of the praetor's.” Do
                you not see how clear the matter both is and was when even Timarchides is afraid of
                this? Will you not admit that we are not inventing this charge against you, but that
                your freedman has been this long time seeking some defence against this charge? Your
                freedman and officer, one most intimate, and indeed connected with you and your
                children in everything, writes to Apronius, that it is universally pointed out to
                Metellus that Apronius had been your partner in the tenths. “Make him see the
                dishonesty of the cultivators: they shall suffer for it, if the gods will.” What, in
                the name of the immortal gods, is the meaning of that? or on what account can we say
                that such great and bitter hatred is excited against the cultivators? What injury
                have the cultivators of the soil done to Verres, that even his freedman and officer
                should attack them with so inimical a disposition in these letters? <milestone n="68" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/> And I would not, O judges, have
                read to you the letter of this runaway slave, if I had not wished you to see from it
                the precepts, and customs, and system of the whole household. Do you see how he
                advises Apronius? by what means and by what presents he may insinuate himself into
                the intimacy of Metellus? how he may corrupt Vulteius? how he may win over with
                bribes the clerks and the chief officer? He teaches him what he has himself seen
                done. He teaches a stranger the lessons which he has learnt at home himself. But in
                this one thing he makes a mistake, that he thinks there is the same road to every
                one's intimacy. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="158" resp="perseus"><p> Although I am deservedly angry with Metellus, still I will say this which is true.
                Apronius could not corrupt Metellus with bribes, as he had corrupted Verres, nor
                with banquets, nor with women, nor with debauched and profligate conversation, by
                which means he had, I will not say crept into that man's friendship slowly and
                gradually, but had in a very short time got possession of the whole man and his
                whole retinue. But as for the retinue of Metellus, which he speaks of, what was the
                use of his corrupting that, when no judges were appointed out of it to judge the
                causes of the cultivators? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="159" resp="perseus"><p> For as for what he writes, that the son of Metellus was a mere boy, he is greatly
                mistaken. For there is not the same access to the son of every praetor. O
                Timarchides, the son of Metellus is in the province, not a boy, but a virtuous and
                modest youth, worthy of his rank and name. How that boy of yours had behaved in the
                province, I would not say if I thought it the fault of the boy, and not the fault of
                his father. Did not you, though you knew yourself and your own habits of life, O
                Verres, take with you your son, still clad in the robes of a boy, into <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, so that even if nature had separated the boy
                from his father's vices and from every resemblance to his family, still habit and
                training might prevent his degenerating from them? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="160" resp="perseus"><p> Suppose there had been in him the disposition of Caius Laelius, of Marcus Cato,
                still what good could be expected or extracted out of one who has lived in the
                licentious school of his father in such a way that he has never seen one modest or
                sober banquet? who since he has grown up has lived in daily revels for three years
                among immodest women and intemperate men? who has never heard a word from his father
                by which he might become more modest or more virtuous? who has never seen his father
                do anything, which, if he had imitated, would not have laid him under the most
                disgraceful imputation of all, that of being considered like his father? </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>