<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-eng3:9.33.1-9.33.9</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.perseus-eng3:9.33.1-9.33.9</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="9" subtype="book" type="textpart"><div n="33" subtype="chapter" type="textpart"><div n="1" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>The<note anchored="true" type="sum" resp="ed" place="unspecified">Appius
								Claudius prolongs his Censorship in defiance of the Law.</note>
							consuls for the following year were Q. Fabius and C. Marcius Rutilus.
							Fabius took over the command at Sutrium, and brought reinforcements from
							Rome. </p></div><div n="2" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> A fresh army was also raised in Etruria and sent to support the
							besiegers. Very many years had elapsed since there had been any contests
							between the patrician magistrates and the tribunes of the plebs. </p></div><div n="3" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Now, however, a dispute arose through that family which seemed marked
							out by destiny to be the cause of quarrels with the plebs and its
							tribunes. Appius Claudius had now been censor eighteen months, the
							period fixed by the Aemilian Law for the duration of that office. </p></div><div n="4" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> In spite of the fact that his colleague, C. Plautius, had resigned, he
							could under no circumstances whatever be induced to vacate his office.
							P. Sempronius was the tribune of the plebs who commenced an action for
							limiting his censorship to the legal period. </p></div><div n="5" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> In taking this step he was acting in the interests of justice quite as
							much as in the interests of the people, and he carried the sympathies of
							the aristocracy no less than he had the support of the masses. </p></div><div n="6" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> He recited the several provisions of the Aemilian Law and extolled its
							author, Mamercus Aemilius, the Dictator, for having shortened the
							censorship. Formerly, he reminded his hearers, it was held for five
							years, a time long enough to make it tyrannical and despotic, Aemilius
							limited it to eighteen months. </p></div><div n="7" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Then turning to Appius he asked him: “Pray tell me, Appius, what
							would you have done had you been censor at the time that C. Furius and
							M. Geganius were censors?” Appius Claudius replied that the
							tribune's question had not much bearing on his case. </p></div><div n="8" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> He argued that though the law might be binding in the case of those
							censors during whose period of office it was passed, because it </p></div><div n="9" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> was after they had been appointed that the people ordered the measure to
							become law, and the last order of the people was law for the time being,
							nevertheless, neither he nor any of the censors subsequently appointed
							could be bound by it because all succeeding censors had been appointed
							by the order of the people and the last order of the people was the law
							for the time being. <note anchored="true" n="14" resp="ed" place="unspecified">Appius' argument is this: The Aemilian Law only
								restricted the censorship of Furius and Geganius, because whilst
								their election was tantamount to one “order of the
								people” the Aemilian Law was a second “order of the
								people” superseding the first. But in all subsequent
								elections there was only one “order of the people,”
								viz. the election itself, and therefore the original law which fixed
								the duration of the office at five years resumed its
								validity.</note>
						            </p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>