<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-eng2:2.2.101-2.2.120</requestUrn>
            </request>
            <reply>
                <urn>urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi005.perseus-eng2:2.2.101-2.2.120</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="2"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="101" resp="perseus"><p> When this news was brought to him, he for a while was alarmed and agitated; he
                turned the blunt end of his pen <note anchored="true">To turn the pen was to erase
                  what had been written “At one end the stilus was sharpened to a point for
                  scratching the characters on the wax, while the other end, being fat and circular
                  served to render the surface of the tablets smooth again, and so to obliterate
                  what had been written. Thus <foreign xml:lang="la">vertere stilum</foreign> means
                  to erase, and hence to correct”—Smith, Dict. Ant. in v. ...</note> on to his
                tablets, and by so doing he overturned the whole of his cause. For he left himself
                nothing which could be defended by any means whatever. For if he were to urge in his
                defence, “It is lawful to take a charge against an absent man, no law forbids this
                being done in a province,” he would seem to be putting forth a faulty and worthless
                defence, but still it would be some sort of a defence. Lastly, he might employ that
                most desperate refuge, of saying, that he had acted ignorantly; that he had thought
                that it was lawful. And although this is the worst defence of all, still he would
                seem to have said something. He erases that from his tablets which he had put down,
                and enters “that the charge was brought against Sthenius while he was present.”</p></div><milestone n="42" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="102" resp="perseus"><p> Here consider in how many toils he involved himself; from which he could never
                disentangle himself. In the first place, he had often and openly declared himself in
                  <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> from his tribunal, and had
                asserted to many people in private conversation, that it was lawful to take a charge
                against an absent man; that he, for example, had done so himself—which he had. That
                he was in the habit of constantly saying this, was stated at the former pleading by
                Sextus Pompeius Chlorus, a man of whose virtue I have before spoken highly; and by
                Cnaeus Pompeius Theodorus, a man approved of by the judgment of that most
                illustrious man Cnaeus Pompeius in many most important affairs, and, by universal
                consent, a most accomplished person; and by Posides Matro of Solentum, a man of the
                highest rank, of the greatest reputation and virtue. And as many as you please will
                tell you the same thing at this present trial, both men who have heard it from his
                own mouth,—some of the leading men of our order,—and others too who were present
                when the accusation was taken against Sthenius in his absence. Moreover at
                  <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName>, when the matter was discussed in
                the senate, all his friends, and among them his own father, defended him on the
                ground of its being lawful so to act;—of its having been done constantly;—of his
                having done what he had done according to the example and established precedent of
                others. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="103" resp="perseus"><p> Besides, all <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> gives evidence of the
                fact which in the common petitions of all the states has prescribed this request to
                the consuls, “to beg and entreat of the conscript fathers, not to allow charges to
                be received against the absent.” Concerning which matter you heard Cnaeus Lentulus,
                the advocate of <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, and a most
                admirable young man, say, that the Sicilians, when they were instructing him in
                their case, and pointing out to him what matters were to be urged in their behalf
                before the senate, complained much of this misfortune of Sthenius, and on account of
                this injustice which had been done to Sthenius, resolved to make this demand which I
                have mentioned. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="104" resp="perseus"><p> And as this is the ease, were you endued with such insanity and audacity, as, in a
                matter so clear, so thoroughly proved,—made so notorious even by you yourself, to
                dare to corrupt the public records? But how did you corrupt them? Did you not do it
                in such a way that, even if we all kept silence, still your own handwriting would be
                sufficient to condemn you? Give me, it you please, the document. Take it round to
                the judges; show it to them. Do you not see that the whole of this entry, where he
                states that the charge was made against Sthenius in his presence, is a correction?
                What was written there before? What blunder did he correct when he made that
                erasure? Why, O judges, do you wait for proofs of this charge from us? We say
                nothing; the books are before you, which cry out themselves that they have been
                tampered with and amended. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="105" resp="perseus"><p> Do you think you can possibly escape out of this business, when we are following
                you up, not by any uncertain opinion, but by your own traces, which you have left
                deeply printed and fresh in the public documents? Has he decided, (I should like to
                know,) without hearing the cause, that Sthenius has tampered with the public
                documents, who cannot possibly defend himself from the charge of having tampered
                with the public documents in the case of that very Sthenius?</p></div><milestone n="43" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="106" resp="perseus"><p> See now another instance of madness; see how, in trying to acquit himself; he
                entangles himself still more. He assigns an advocate to Sthenius.—Whom? Any relation
                or intimate friend? No.—Any citizen, any honourable and noble man of <placeName key="tgn,7000457">Florence</placeName>? Not even that.—At least it was some
                Sicilian, in whom there was some credit and dignity? Far from it.—Whom then did he
                assign to him? A Roman citizen. Who can approve of this? When Sthenius was the man
                of the highest rank in his city, a man of most extensive connections, with
                numberless friends; when, besides, he was of the greatest influence all over
                  <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, by his own personal character and
                popularity; could he find no Sicilian who was willing to be appointed his advocate?
                Will you approve of this? Did he himself prefer a Roman citizen? Tell me what
                Sicilian, when he was defendant in any action, ever had a Roman citizen assigned to
                him as his advocate? Produce the records of all the praetors who preceded Verres;
                open them. If you find one such instance, I will then admit to you that this was
                done as you have entered it in your public documents. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="107" resp="perseus"><p> Oh but, I suppose, Sthenius thought it honourable to himself for Verres to choose
                a man for his advocate out of the number of Roman citizens who were his own friends
                and connections! Whom did he choose? Whose name is written in the records? Caius
                Claudius, the son of Caius, of the <placeName key="tgn,3000935">Palatine</placeName>
                tribe. I do not ask who this Claudius is; how illustrious, how honourable, how well
                suited to the business, and deserving that, because of his influence and dignity,
                Sthenius should abandon the custom of all the Sicilians, and have a Roman citizen
                for his advocate. I do not ask any of these questions;—for perhaps Sthenius was
                influenced not by the high position of the man, but by his intimacy with him.—What?
                What shall we say if there was in the whole world a greater enemy to Sthenius than
                this very Caius Claudius, both constantly in old times, and especially at this time
                and in this affair?—if he appeared against him on the charge of tampering with the
                public documents?—if he opposed him by every means in his power? Which shall we
                believe,—that an enemy of Sthenius was actually appointed his advocate, or that you,
                at a time of the greatest danger to Sthenius, made free with the name of his enemy,
                to ensure his ruin?</p></div><milestone n="44" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="108" resp="perseus"><p> And that no one may have any doubt as to the real nature of the whole transaction,
                although I feel sure that by this time that man's rascality is pretty evident to you
                all, still listen yet a little longer. Do you see that man with curly hair, of a
                dark complexion, who is looking at us with such a countenance as shows that he seems
                to himself a very clever fellow? him, I mean, who has the papers in his hand—who is
                writing—who is prompting him—who is next to him. That is Caius Claudius, who in
                  <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> was considered Verres's agent and
                interpreter, the manager of all his dirty work, a sort of colleague to Timarchides.
                Now he is promoted so high that he scarcely seems to yield to Apronius in intimacy
                with him; indeed he called himself the colleague and ally not of Timarchides, but of
                Verres himself.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="109" resp="perseus"><p>Now doubt, if you can, that he chose that man of all the world to impose the
                worthless character of a false advocate on, whom he knew to be most hostile to
                Sthenius, and most friendly to himself. And will you hesitate in this case, O
                judges, to punish such enormous audacity and cruelty and injustice as that of this
                man? Will you hesitate to follow the example of those judges, who, when they had
                condemned Cnaeus Dolabella, rescinded the condemnation of Philodamus of Opus,
                because a charge had been received against him not in his absence, which is of all
                things the most unjust and the most intolerable, but after a commission had been
                given him by his fellow-citizens to proceed to <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName> as their ambassador? That precedent which the judges, in
                obedience to the principles of equity, established in a less important cause, will
                you hesitate to adopt in a cause of the greatest consequence, especially now that it
                has been established by the authority of others?</p></div><milestone n="45" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="110" resp="perseus"><p> But who was it, O Verres, whom you treated with such great, with such unexampled
                injustice? Against whom did you receive a charge in his absence? Whom did you
                condemn in his absence; not only without any crime, and without any witness, but
                even without any accuser? Who was it? O ye immortal gods! I will not say your own
                friend,—that which is the dearest title among men. I will not say your host,—which
                is the most holy name. There is nothing in Sthenius's case which I speak of less
                willingly. The only thing which I find it possible to blame him in is,—that he, a
                most moderate and upright man, invited you, a man full of adultery, and crime, and
                wickedness, to his house; that he, who had been and was connected by ties of
                hospitality with Caius Marius, with Cnaeus Pompeius, with Caius Marcellus, with
                Lucius Sisenna, your defender, and with other excellent citizens, added your name
                also to that of those unimpeachable men.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="111" resp="perseus"><p>On which account I make no complaint of violated hospitality, and of your
                abominable wickedness in violating it; I say this not to those who know
                Sthenius,—that is to say, not to any one of those who have been in <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>; (for no one who has is ignorant in how great
                authority he lived in his own city, in what great honour and consideration among all
                the Sicilians;) but I say it that those, too, who have not been in the province, may
                be able to understand who he was in whose case you established such a precedent,
                that both on account of the iniquity of the deed, as well as on account of the rank
                of the man, it appeared scandalous and intolerable to every one. </p></div><milestone n="46" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="112" resp="perseus"><p> Is not Sthenius the man, he who when he had very easily obtained all the
                honourable offices in his city, executed them with the greatest splendor, and
                magnificence?—who decorated a town, not itself of the first rank, with most spacious
                places of public resort, and most splendid monuments, at his own expense?—on account
                of whose good services towards the state of Thermae, and towards all the Sicilians,
                a brazen tablet was set up in the senate-house at Thermae; in which mention was made
                of his services, and engraved at the public expense?—which tablet was torn down
                under your government, and is now brought hither by me, that all may know the honour
                in which he was held among his countrymen, and his preeminent dignity. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="113" resp="perseus"><p> Is this the man, who when he was accused before that most illustrious man, Cnaeus
                Pompeius, and when his enemies and accusers charged him, in terms calculated to
                excite odium against him, rather than true, of having been ill affected to the
                republic on account of his intimacy and his connections of hospitality with Caius
                Marius, was acquitted by Cnaeus Pompeius with such language as showed that, from
                what had come out at that very trial, Cnaeus Pompeius judged him most worthy of his
                own intimacy? and moreover was defended and extolled by all the Sicilians in such a
                manner, that Pompeius thought that by his acquittal he had earned, not only the
                gratitude of the man himself, but that of the whole province? Lastly, is not he the
                man who had such affection towards the republic, and also such great authority among
                his fellow-citizens, that he alone in all <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, while you were praetor, did what not only no other Sicilian,
                but what all <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> even could not
                do,—namely, prevented you from taking away any statue, any ornament, any sacred
                vessel, or any public property from Thermae; and that too when there were many
                remarkable beautiful things there, and though you coveted everything? </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="114" resp="perseus"><p> See now, what a difference there is between you, in whose name days of festival
                are kept among the Sicilians, and those splendid Verrean games, are celebrated; to
                whom gilt statues are erected at <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName>,
                presented by the commonwealth of <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, as
                we see inscribed upon them;—see, I say, what a difference there is between you and
                this Sicilian, who was condemned by you, the patron of <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>. Him very many cities of <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> praise by public resolutions in his favour, by their own
                evidence, by deputations went hither with that object. You, the patron of all the
                Sicilians, the solitary state of the Mamertini, the partner of your thefts and
                crimes, praises publicly; and yet in such a way that, by a new process, the deputies
                themselves injure your cause, though the deputation praises you. These other states
                all publicly accuse you, complain of you, impeach you by letters, by deputations, by
                evidence; and, if you are acquitted, think themselves utterly ruined.</p></div><milestone n="47" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="115" resp="perseus"><p> It is in the case of this man and of his property that you have erected a monument
                of your crimes and cruelty even on Mount Eryx itself; on which is inscribed the name
                Sthenius of Thermae. I saw a Cupid made of silver, with a torch. What object had
                you,—what reason was there for employing the plunder of Sthenius on that subject
                rather than on any other? Did you wish it to be a token of your own cupidity, or a
                trophy of your friendship and connection of hospitality with him, or a proof of your
                love towards him? Men, who in their excelling wickedness are pleased not only with
                their lust and pleasure itself, but also with the fame of their wickedness, do wish
                to leave in many places the marks and traces of their crimes. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="116" resp="perseus"><p> He was burning with love of that hostess for whose sake he had violated the laws
                of hospitality. He wished that not only to be known, but also to be recorded for
                ever. And therefore, out of the proceeds of that very action which he had performed,
                Agathinus being the accuser, he thought that a reward was especially due to Venus,
                who had caused the prosecution and the whole proceeding. I should think you grateful
                to the Gods if you had given this gift to Venus, not out of the property of
                Sthenius, but out of your own, as you ought to have done, especially as an
                inheritance had come to you from Chelidon that very same year. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="117" resp="perseus"><p> On these grounds now, even if I had not undertaken this cause at the request of
                all the Sicilians; if the whole province had not requested this favour of me; if my
                affection and love for the republic, and the injury done to the credit of our order
                and of the courts of justice, had not compelled me to do so; and if this had been my
                only reason, that you had so cruelly, and wickedly, and abominably treated my friend
                and connection <note anchored="true">I have in some instances translated <foreign xml:lang="la">hospes</foreign> “friend,” and oftener still “connection,” though
                  either word is far from representing adequately the idea of the Latin <foreign xml:lang="la"> hospes</foreign>, because, as modern manners are unacquainted
                  with the usage, modern languages have no word to express it.</note> Sthenius, to
                whom I had formed an extraordinary attachment in my quaestorship, of whom I had the
                highest possible opinion, whom while I was in the province I knew to be most zealous
                and earnest for my reputation,—I should still think I had plenty of reason to incur
                the enmity of a most worthless man, in order to defend the safety and fortunes of my
                friend. </p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="118" resp="perseus"><p> Many men have done the same in the times of our ancestors. Lately, too, that most
                eminent man Cnaeus Domitius did so, who accused Marcus Silanus, a man of consular
                rank, on account of the injuries done by him to Egritomarus of the Transalpine
                country, his friend. I should think it became me to follow the example of their good
                feeling and regard for their duty; and I should hold out hope to my friends and
                connections to think that they would live a safer life owing to my protection. But
                when the cause of Sthenius draws along with it the common calamity of the whole
                province, and when many of my friends and connections are being defended by me at
                the same time, both in their public and private interests, I ought not in truth to
                fear that any one can suppose that I have done what I have in undertaking this cause
                under the pressure and compulsion of any motive except that of the strictest duty.
                  <milestone n="48" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/> And that we may at last
                give up speaking of the investigations made, and the judicial proceedings conducted,
                and of the decisions given by that man; and as his exploits of that class are
                countless, let us put some bounds and limits to our speech and accusation. We will
                take a few cases of another sort.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="119" resp="perseus"><p><milestone unit="Para"/>You have heard Quintus Varius say, that his agents paid
                that man a hundred and thirty thousand <foreign xml:lang="la">sesterces</foreign>
                for a decision in his cause. You recollect that the evidence of Quintus Varius was
                corroborated, and that this whole affair was proved by the testimony of Caius
                Sacerdos, a most excellent man. You know that Cnaeus Sertius and Marcus Modius,
                Roman knights, and that six hundred Roman citizens besides, and many Sicilians, said
                that they had given that money for decisions in their causes. And why need I dilate
                upon this accusation when the whole matter is set plainly forth in the evidence? Why
                should I argue about what no one can doubt? Or will any man in the world doubt that
                he set up his judicial decisions for sale in <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName>, when at <placeName key="perseus,Rome">Rome</placeName> he
                sold his very edict and all his decrees? and that he received money from the
                Sicilians in issuing extraordinary decrees, when he actually made a demand on Marcus
                Octavius Ligur for giving a decision on his cause?</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="120" resp="perseus"><p>For what method of extorting money did he ever omit? What method did he fail to
                devise, even if it had escaped the notice of every one else? Was anything in the
                Sicilian states ever sought to be obtained in which there is any honour, any power,
                or any authority, that you did not make it a source of your own gain, and sell it to
                the best bidder? <milestone n="49" unit="chapter"/><milestone unit="Para"/> At the
                former pleading evidence was given of both a public and a private nature; deputies
                from Centuripa, from Halesa, from <placeName key="tgn,7003947">Catina</placeName>,
                and from <placeName key="perseus,Panormus">Panormus</placeName>, and from many other
                cities gave evidence; but now, also, a great many private individuals have been
                examined, by whose testimony you have ascertained that no one in all <placeName key="tgn,7003122">Sicily</placeName> for the space of three years was ever made
                senator in any city for nothing,—no one by vote, as their laws prescribe,—no one
                except by his command, or by his letters; and that in the appointment of all these
                senators, not only were no votes given, but there was not even any consideration of
                those families from which it was lawful to select men for that body, nor of their
                income, nor of their age; nor were any other of the Sicilian laws of the slightest
                influence.</p></div></div></div></div></body></text></TEI>
                </passage>
            </reply>
            </GetPassage>