<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:phi0914.phi001.perseus-eng3:10.8.10-10.9.8</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.perseus-eng3:10.8.10-10.9.8</urn>
                <passage>
                    <TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0"><text><body><div n="urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.perseus-eng3" type="edition" xml:lang="eng"><div n="10" subtype="book" type="textpart"><div n="8" subtype="chapter" type="textpart"><div n="10" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Have you never heard the remark that it was not men sent down from
							heaven who were originally created patricians, but those who could cite
							a father,<note anchored="true" n="6" resp="ed" place="unspecified">i.e.
								to prove one's legitimacy as freeborn. The phrase seems to be an
								attempt to explain the etymology of <foreign xml:lang="lat">patri-cuius</foreign> —<foreign xml:lang="lat">pater</foreign>=“father,” <foreign xml:lang="lat">cieo</foreign>=“cite,” or “mention by
								name.” </note> which is nothing more than saying that they
							were </p></div><div n="11" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> freeborn. I can now cite a consul as my father, and my son will be able
							to cite him as his grandfather. It simply comes to this, Quirites, that
							we can get nothing without a struggle. It is only a quarrel that the
							patricians are seeking, they do not care in the least about the </p></div><div n="12" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> result. I for my part support this measure, which I believe will be for
							your good and happiness and a blessing to the State, and I hold that you
							ought to pass it.” </p></div></div><div n="9" subtype="chapter" type="textpart"><div n="1" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>The Assembly was on the point of ordering the voting to proceed, and it
							was evident that the measure would be adopted, when, on the intervention
							of some of the tribunes, all further business was adjourned for the day.
						</p></div><div n="2" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> On the morrow, the dissentient tribunes having given way, the law was
							passed amid great enthusiasm. The co-opted pontiffs were P. Decius Mus,
							the supporter of the measure, P. Sempronius Sophus, C. Marcius Rutilus,
							and M. Livius Denter. The five augurs who were also taken from the plebs
							were C. Genucius, P. Aelius Paetus, M. Minucius Faesus, C. Marcius, and
							T. Publilius. </p></div><div n="3" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> So the number of the pontiffs was raised to eight and that of the augurs
							to nine. In<note anchored="true" type="sum" resp="ed" place="unspecified">The Valerian Law.</note> this year the consul, M. Valerius, carried
							a proposal to strengthen the provisions of the law touching the right of
							appeal. </p></div><div n="4" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> This was the third time since the expulsion of the kings that this law
							was re-enacted, and always by the same family. I think that the reason
							for renewing it so often was solely the fact that the excessive power
							exercised by a few men was dangerous to the liberties of the plebs. </p></div><div n="5" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> The Porcian law, however, seems to have been passed solely for the
							protection of the citizens in life and limb, for it imposed the severest
							penalties on any one who killed or scourged a Roman citizen. </p></div><div n="6" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> The Valerian law, it is true, forbade any one who had exercised his
							right of appeal to be scourged or beheaded, but if any one transgressed
							its provisions it added no penalty, but simply declared such
							transgression to be a “wicked act.” </p></div><div n="7" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Such was the self-respect and sense of shame amongst the men of those
							days, that I believe that declaration to have been a sufficiently strong
							barrier against violations of the law. </p></div><div n="8" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Nowadays there is hardly a slave who would not use stronger language
							against his master. Valerius<note anchored="true" type="sum" resp="ed" place="unspecified">Wars with the Aequi and Umbrians.</note> also
							conducted a war against the Aequi, who had recommenced hostilities, but
							who retained nothing of their earlier character except their restless
							temper. The other consul, Apuleius, invested the town of Nequinum in
							Umbria. </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>