In truth, suppose, for example, that Caius Verres had demanded a hundred and
twenty thousand sesterces from the people of
Centuripa, and had taken this money from them; there would have been no doubt, I
conceive, that, if that were proved, he must have been condemned.—What then? Suppose
he demanded three hundred thousand sesterces of the
same people; and compelled them to give them, and carried them off? Shall he be
acquitted because it was entered in the accounts that that money was given for
statues? I think not; unless, indeed, our object is to create, not an unwillingness
to take money on the part of our magistrates, but a cause for giving it on the part
of our allies. But if statues are a great delight to any one, and if any one is
greatly attracted by the honour and glory of having them raised to him, still he
must lay down these rules; first of all, that he must not take to his own house the
money given for those purposes; secondly, that there must be some limit to those
statues; and lastly, that at all events they must not be exacted from unwilling
people.
And concerning the embezzlement of the money, I ask of you whether the cities
themselves were accustomed to let out contracts for erecting statues to the man who
would take the contract on the best terms, or to appoint some surveyor to
superintend the erection of the statues, or to pay the money to you, or to any one
whom you appointed? For the statues were erected under the superintendence of those
men by whom that honour was paid to you—I am glad to hear it; but, if that money was
paid to Timarchides, cease I beg of you, to pretend that you were desirous of glory
and of monuments when you are detected is so evident a robbery. What then? Is there to be no limit to statues? But there must be.
Indeed, consider the matter in this way.
The city of Syracuse (to speak of
that city in preference to others) gave him a statue;—it is an honour: and gave his
father one;—a pretty and profitable picture of affection: and gave his son one;—this
may be endured, for they did not hate the boy: still how often, and for how many
individuals will you take statues from the Syracusans? You accepted one to be placed
in the forum. You compelled them to place one in the senate-house. You ordered them
to contribute money for those statues which were to be erected at Rome. You ordered that the same men should also
contribute as agriculturists, they did so. You ordered the same men also to pay
their contribution to the common revenue of Sicily; even that they did also. When one city contributed money on
so many different presences, and when the other cities did the same, does not the
fact itself warn you to think that some bounds must be put to this covetousness? But
if no city did this of its own accord; if all of them only paid you this money for
statues because they were induced to do so by your command, by fear, by force, by
injury; then, O ye immortal gods, can it be doubtful to any one, that, even if any
one were to establish a law, that it was allowable to accept money for statues,
still he would also establish one, that at all events it was not allowable to extort
it?
First, therefore, I will cite the whole of Sicily as a witness on this point; and Sicily declares to me with one voice that an immense sum of money was
extorted from her by force under the name of providing statues. For the deputations
of all the cities, in their common petitions—nearly all of which have arisen from
your injuries,—have inserted this demand also; “that they might not for the future
promise statues to any one till he had left the province.” There have been many praetors in
Sicily. Often, in the times of our
ancestors, the Sicilians have approached the senate; often in the memory of the
present generation; but it is your praetorship that has introduced and originated a
new kind of petition.
For what else is so strange, not only in the matter but in the very form of the
petition? For other points which occur in the same petitions with reference to your
injuries, are indeed novel, but still they are not urged in a novel manner. The
Sicilians beg and entreat of the conscript fathers that our magistrates may
henceforth sell the tenths according to the law of Hiero. You were the first who had
sold them in a way contrary to that law.—That they may not put a money value on the
corn which is ordered for the public granary. This, too, is now requested for the
first time on account of your three denarii: See the note on
the next oration, “De Re Frumentaria,” for an explanation of this;
and on points connected with the topic of corn, and the societas of the publicani, see the
Argument of the next oration. but that kind of petition is not
unprecedented.—That a charge be not taken against any one in his absence. This has
arisen from the misfortune of Sthenius, and your tyranny.—I will not enumerate the
other points. All the demands of the Sicilians are of such a nature that they look
like charges collected against you alone as a criminal. Still all these, though they
refer to new injuries, preserve the ordinary form of requests.
But this request about the statues must seem ridiculous to the man who is not
acquainted with the facts and with the meaning of it; for they entreat that they may
not be compelled to erect statues;—what then? That they may not be allowed to do
so;—what does this mean? Do you request of me not to be allowed to do what it
depends on yourself to do or not? Ask rather that no one may compel you to promise a
statue, or to erect one against your will. I shall do no good, says he; for they
will all deny that they compelled me to do so: if you wish for my preservation, put
this violence on me,—that it may be utterly illegal for me to make such a promise.
It is from your praetorship that such a request as this has taken its rise; and
those who employ it, intimate and openly declare that they, entirely against their
will, contributed money for your statues, being compelled by fear and violence.