Life of Cicero by Anthony Trollope
A >>
Anthony Trollope >> Life of Cicero
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 | 10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27
We have now come to the first of those episodes, and I have to tell
the way in which Cicero struggled with Verres, and how he conquered
him. In 74 B.C. Verres was Praetor in Rome. At that period of the
Republic there were eight Praetors elected annually, two of whom
remained in the city, whereas the others were employed abroad,
generally with the armies of the Empire. In the next year, 73 B.C.,
Verres went in due course to Sicily with proconsular or propraetorial
authority, having the government assigned to him for twelve months.
This was usual and constitutional, but it was not unusual, even if
unconstitutional, that this period should be prolonged. In the case of
Verres it was prolonged, so that he should hold the office for three
years. He had gone through the other offices of the State, having been
Quaestor in Asia and Aedile afterward in Rome, to the great misfortune
of all who were subjected to his handling, as we shall learn
by-and-by. The facts are mentioned here to show that the great offices
of the Republic were open to such a man as Verres. They were in
fact more open to such a candidate than they would be to one less
iniquitous--to an honest man or a scrupulous one, or to one partially
honest, or not altogether unscrupulous. If you send a dog into a wood
to get truffles, you will endeavor to find one that will tear up as
many truffles as possible. A proconsular robber did not rob only for
himself; he robbed more or less for all Rome. Verres boasted that with
his three years of rule he could bring enough home to bribe all the
judges, secure all the best advocates, and live in splendid opulence
for the rest of his life. What a dog he was to send into a wood for
truffles!
To such a condition as this had Rome fallen when the deputies from
Sicily came to complain of their late governor, and to obtain the
services of Cicero in seeking for whatever reparation might be
possible. Verres had carried on his plunder during the years 73, 72,
71 B.C. During this time Cicero had been engaged sedulously as an
advocate in Rome. We know the names of some of the cases in which he
was engaged--those, for instance, for Publius Oppius, who, having
been Quaestor in Bithynia, was accused by his Proconsul of having
endeavored to rob the soldiers of their dues. We are told that the
poor province suffered greatly under these two officers, who were
always quarrelling as to a division of their plunder. In this case the
senior officer accused the younger, and the younger, by Cicero's aid,
was acquitted. Quintilian more than once refers to the speech made
for Oppius. Cicero also defended Varenus, who was charged with having
murdered his brother, and one Caius Mustius, of whom we only know
that he was a farmer of taxes. He was advocate also for Sthenius, a
Sicilian, who was accused before the Tribunes by Verres. We shall hear
of Sthenius again among the victims in Sicily. The special charge in
this case was that, having been condemned by Verres as Praetor in
Sicily, he had run away to Rome, which was illegal. He was, however,
acquitted. Of these speeches we have only some short fragments, which
have been quoted by authors whose works have come down to us, such as
Quintilian; by which we know, at any rate, that Cicero's writings had
been so far carefully preserved, and that they were commonly read in
those days. I will translate here the concluding words of a short
paper written by M. du Rozoir in reference to Cicero's life at this
period: "The assiduity of our orator at the bar had obtained for him
a high degree of favor among the people, because they had seen how
strictly he had observed that Cincian law which forbade advocates to
take either money or presents for then pleadings--which law, however,
the advocates of the day generally did not scruple to neglect."[97]
It is a good thing to be honest when honesty is in vogue; but to be
honest when honesty is out of fashion is magnificent.
In the affair with Verres, there are two matters to interest the
reader--indeed, to instruct the reader--if the story were sufficiently
well told. The iniquity of Verres is the first--which is of so
extravagant a nature as to become farcical by the absurdity of the
extent to which he was not afraid to go in the furtherance of his
avarice and lust. As the victims suffered two thousand years ago, we
can allow ourselves to be amused by the inexhaustible fertility of the
man's resources and the singular iniquity of his schemes. Then we
are brought face to face with the barefaced corruption of the Roman
judges--a corruption which, however, became a regular trade, if not
ennobled, made, at any rate, aristocratic by the birth, wealth high
names, and senatorial rank of the robbers. Sulla, for certain State
purposes--which consisted in the maintenance of the oligarchy--had
transferred the privileges of sitting on the judgment-seat from
the Equites, or Knights, to the Senators. From among the latter a
considerable number--thirty, perhaps, or forty, or even fifty--were
appointed to sit with the Praetor to hear criminal cases of
importance, and by their votes, which were recorded on tablets, the
accused person was acquitted or condemned. To be acquitted by the most
profuse corruption entailed no disgrace on him who was tried, and
often but little on the judges who tried him. In Cicero's time the
practice, with all its chances, had come to be well understood. The
Provincial Governors, with their Quaestors and lieutenants, were
chosen from the high aristocracy, which also supplied the judges.
The judges themselves had been employed, or hoped to be employed, in
similar lucrative service. The leading advocates belonged to the same
class. If the proconsular thief, when he had made his bag, would
divide the spoil with some semblance of equity among his brethren,
nothing could be more convenient. The provinces were so large, and
the Greek spirit of commercial enterprise which prevailed in them so
lively, that there was room for plunder ample, at any rate, for a
generation or two. The Republic boasted that, in its love of pure
justice, it had provided by certain laws for the protection of its
allied subjects against any possible faults of administration on the
part of its own officers. If any injury were done to a province, or a
city, or even to an individual, the province, or city, or individual
could bring its grievance to the ivory chair of the Praetor in Rome
and demand redress; and there had been cases not a few in which a
delinquent officer had been condemned to banishment. Much, indeed, was
necessary before the scheme as it was found to exist by Verres could
work itself into perfection. Verres felt that in his time everything
had been done for security as well as splendor. He would have all the
great officers of State on his side. The Sicilians, if he could manage
the case as he thought it might be managed, would not have a leg to
stand upon. There was many a trick within his power before they could
succeed in making good even their standing before the Praetor. It was
in this condition of things that Cicero bethought himself that he
might at one blow break through the corruption of the judgment-seat,
and this he determined to do by subjecting the judges to the light of
public opinion. If Verres could be tried under a bushel, as it were,
in the dark, as many others had been tried, so that little or nothing
should be said about the trial in the city at large, then there would
be no danger for the judges. It could only be by shaming them, by
making them understand that Rome would become too hot to hold them,
that they could be brought to give a verdict against the accused. This
it was that Cicero determined to effect, and did effect. And we see
throughout the whole pleadings that he was concerned in the matter not
only for the Sicilians, or against Verres. Could something be done for
the sake of Rome, for the sake of the Republic, to redeem the courts
of justice from the obloquy which was attached to them? Might it
be possible for a man so to address himself not only to the
judgment-seat, but to all Rome, as to do away with this iniquity once
and forever? Could he so fill the minds of the citizens generally
with horror at such proceedings as to make them earnest in demanding
reform? Hortensius, the great advocate of the day, was not only
engaged on behalf of Verres, but he was already chosen as Consul for
the next year. Metellus, who was elected Praetor for the next year,
was hot in defence of Verres. Indeed, there were three Metelluses
among the friends of the accused, who had also on his side the Scipio
of the day. The aristocracy of Rome was altogether on the side of
Verres, as was natural. But if Cicero might succeed at all in this
which he meditated, the very greatness of his opponents would help
him. When it was known that he was to be pitted against Hortensius as
an advocate, and that he intended to defy Hortensius as the coming
Consul, then surely Rome would be awake to the occasion; and if Rome
could be made to awake herself, then would this beautiful scheme of
wealth from provincial plunder be brought to an end.
I will first speak of the work of the judges, and of the attempts
made to hinder Cicero in the business he had undertaken. Then I will
endeavor to tell something of the story of Verres and his doings. The
subject divides itself naturally in this way. There are extant seven
so-called orations about Verres, of which the two first apply to the
manner in which the case should be brought before the courts. These
two were really spoken, and were so effective that Verres--or probably
Hortensius, on his behalf--was frightened into silence. Verres pleaded
guilty, as we should say, which, in accordance with the usages of
the court, he was enabled to do by retiring and going into voluntary
banishment. This he did, sooner than stand his ground and listen to
the narration of his iniquities as it would be given by Cicero in the
full speech--the "perpetua oratio"--which would follow the examination
of the witnesses. "What the orator said before the examination of the
witnesses was very short. He had to husband his time, as it was a part
of the grand scheme of Hortensius to get adjournment after adjournment
because of certain sacred rites and games, during the celebration
of which the courts could not sit. All this was arranged for in the
scheme; but Cicero, in order that he might baffle the schemers, got
through his preliminary work as quickly as possible, saying all that
he had to say about the manner of the trial, about the judges,
about the scheme, but dilating very little on the iniquities of the
criminal. But having thus succeeded, having gained his cause in a
great measure by the unexpected quickness of his operations, then he
told his story. Then was made that "perpetua oratio" by which we have
learned the extent to which a Roman governor could go on desolating a
people who were intrusted to his protection. This full narration is
divided into five parts, each devoted to a separate class of iniquity.
These were never spoken, though they appear in the form of speeches.
They would have been spoken, if required, in answer to the defence
made by Hortensius on behalf of Verres after the hearing of the
evidence. But the defence broke down altogether, in the fashion thus
described by Cicero himself. "In that one hour in which I spoke"--this
was the speech which we designate as the Actio Prima contra Verrem,
the first pleading made against Verres, to which we shall come
just now--"I took away all hope of bribing the judges from the
accused--from this brazen-faced, rich, dissolute, and abandoned man.
On the first day of the trial, on the mere calling of the names of
the witnesses, the people of Rome were able to perceive that if
this criminal were absolved, then there could be no chance for the
Republic. On the second day his friends and advocates had not only
lost all hope of gaining their cause, but all relish for going on with
it. The third day so paralyzed the man himself that he had to bethink
himself not what sort of reply he could make, but how he could escape
the necessity of replying by pretending to be ill."[98] It was in this
way that the trial was brought to an end.
But we must go back to the beginning. When an accusation was to be
made against some great Roman of the day on account of illegal public
misdoings, as was to be made now against Verres, the conduct of the
case, which would require probably great labor and expense, and would
give scope for the display of oratorical excellence, was regarded as a
task in which a young aspirant to public favor might obtain honor and
by which he might make himself known to the people. It had, therefore,
come to pass that there might be two or more accusers anxious to
undertake the work, and to show themselves off as solicitous on behalf
of injured innocence, or desirous of laboring in the service of the
Republic. When this was the case, a court of judges was called upon to
decide whether this man or that other was most fit to perform the work
in hand. Such a trial was called "Divinatio," because the judges had
to get their lights in the matter as best they could without the
assistance of witnesses--by some process of divination--with the aid
of the gods, as it might be. Cicero's first speech in the matter of
Verres is called In Quintum Caecilium Divinatio, because one Caecilius
came forward to take the case away from him. Here was a part of the
scheme laid by Hortensius. To deal with Cicero in such a matter would
no doubt be awkward. His purpose, his diligence, his skill, his
eloquence, his honesty were known. There must be a trial. So much was
acknowledged; but if the conduct of it could be relegated to a man who
was dishonest, or who had no skill, no fitness, no special desire for
success, then the little scheme could be carried through in that way.
So Caecilius was put forward as Cicero's competitor, and our first
speech is that made by Cicero to prove his own superiority to that of
his rival.
Whether Caecilius was or was not hired to break down in his assumed
duty as accuser, we do not know. The biographers have agreed to say
that such was the case,[99] grounding their assertion, no doubt, on
extreme probability. But I doubt whether there is any evidence as to
this. Cicero himself brings this accusation, but not in that direct
manner which he would have used had he been able to prove it. The
Sicilians, at any rate, said that it was so. As to the incompetency
of the man, there was probably no doubt, and it might be quite as
serviceable to have an incompetent as a dishonest accuser. Caecilius
himself had declared that no one could be so fit as himself for
the work. He knew Sicily well, having been born there. He had been
Quaestor there with Verres, and had been able to watch the governor's
doings. No doubt there was--or had been in more pious days--a feeling
that a Quaestor should never turn against the Proconsul under whom he
had served, and to whom he had held the position almost of a son.[100]
But there was less of that feeling now than heretofore. Verres had
quarrelled with his Quaestor. Oppius was called on to defend himself
against the Proconsul with whom he had served. No one could know the
doings of the governor of a province as well as his own Quaestor; and,
therefore, so said Caecilius, he would be the preferable accuser.
As to his hatred of the man, there could be no doubt as to that.
Everybody knew that they had quarrelled. The purpose, no doubt, was
to give some colorable excuse to the judges for rescuing Verres, the
great paymaster, from the fangs of Cicero.
Cicero's speech on the occasion--which, as speeches went in those
days, was very short--is a model of sagacity and courage. He had to
plead his own fitness, the unfitness of his adversary, and the wishes
in the matter of the Sicilians. This had to be done with no halting
phrases. It was not simply his object to convince a body of honest men
that, with the view of getting at the truth, he would be the better
advocate of the two. We may imagine that there was not a judge there,
not a Roman present, who was not well aware of that before the orator
began. It was needed that the absurdity of the comparison between them
should be declared so loudly that the judges would not dare to
betray the Sicilians, and to liberate the accused, by choosing the
incompetent man. When Cicero rose to speak, there was probably not one
of them of his own party, not a Consul, a Praetor, an Aedile, or
a Quaestor, not a judge, not a Senator, not a hanger-on about the
courts, but was anxious that Verres with his plunder should escape.
Their hope of living upon the wealth of the provinces hung upon it.
But if he could speak winged words--words that should fly all over
Rome, that might fly also among subject nations--then would the judges
not dare to carry out this portion of the scheme.
"When," he says, "I had served as Quaestor in Sicily, and had left the
province after such a fashion that all the Sicilians had a grateful
memory of my authority there, though they had older friends on whom
they relied much, they felt that I might be a bulwark to them in their
need. These Sicilians, harassed and robbed, have now come to me in
public bodies, and have implored me to undertake their defence. 'The
time has come,' they say, 'not that I should look after the interest
of this or that man, but that I should protect the very life and
well-being of the whole province.' I am inclined by my sense of duty,
by the faith which I owe them, by my pity for them, by the example of
all good Romans before me, by the custom of the Republic, by the old
constitution, to undertake this task, not as pertaining to my own
interests, but to those of my close friends."[101] That was his own
reason for undertaking the case. Then he reminds the judges of what
the Roman people wished--the people who had felt with dismay the
injury inflicted upon them by Sulla's withdrawal of all power from the
Tribunes, and by the putting the whole authority of the bench into the
hands of the Senators. "The Roman people, much as they have been
made to suffer, regret nothing of that they have lost so much as the
strength and majesty of the old judges. It is with the desire of
having them back that they demand for the Tribunes their former power.
It is this misconduct of the present judges that has caused them to
ask for another class of men for the judgment-seat. By the fault and
to the shame of the judges of to-day, the Censor's authority, which
has hitherto always been regarded as odious and stern, even that is
now requested by the people."[102] Then he goes on to show that, if
justice is intended, this case will be put into the hands of him whom
the Sicilians have themselves chosen. Had the Sicilians said that they
were unwilling to trust their affairs to Caecilius because they had
not known him, but were willing to trust him, Cicero, whom they did
know, would not even that have been reasonable enough of itself? But
the Sicilians had known both of them, had known Caecilius almost as
well as Cicero, and had expressed themselves clearly. Much as they
desired to have Cicero, they were as anxious not to have Caecilius.
Even had they held their tongues about this, everybody would have
known it; but they had been far from holding their tongues. "Yet you
offer yourself to these most unwilling clients," he says, turning to
Caecilius. "Yet you are ready to plead in a cause that does not belong
to you! Yet you would defend those who would rather have no defender
than such a one as you!"[103] Then he attacks Hortensius, the advocate
for Verres. "Let him not think that, if I am to be employed here, the
judges can be bribed without infinite danger to all concerned. In
undertaking this cause of the Sicilians, I undertake also the cause of
the people of Rome at large. It is not only that one wretched sinner
should be crushed, which is what the Sicilians want, but that this
terrible injustice should be stopped altogether, in compliance with
the wishes of the people."[104] When we remember how this was spoken,
in the presence of those very judges, in the presence of Hortensius
himself, in reliance only on the public opinion which he was to create
by his own words, we cannot but acknowledge that it is very fine.
After that he again turns upon Caecilius. "Learn from me," he says,
"how many things are expected from him who undertakes the accusation
of another. If there be one of those qualities in you, I will give
up to you all that you ask."[105] Caecilius was probably even now in
alliance with Verres. He himself, when Quaestor, had robbed the people
in the collection of the corn dues, and was unable therefore to
include that matter in his accusation. "You can bring no charge
against him on this head, lest it be seen that you were a partner with
him in the business."[106]
He ridicules him as to his personal insufficiency. "What, Caecilius!
as to those practices of the profession without which an action such
as this cannot be carried on, do you think that there is nothing in
them? Need there be no skill in the business, no habit of speaking,
no familiarity with the Forum, with the judgment-seats, and the
laws?"[107] "I know well how difficult the ground is. Let me advise
you to look into yourself, and to see whether you are able to do that
kind of thing. Have you got voice for it, prudence, memory, wit? Are
you able to expose the life of Verres, as it must be done, to divide
it into parts and make everything clear? In doing all this, though
nature should have assisted you"--as it has not at all, is of course
implied--"if from your earliest childhood you had been imbued
with letters; if you had learned Greek at Athens instead of at
Lilybaeum--Latin in Rome instead of in Sicily--still would it not be a
task beyond your strength to undertake such a case, so widely thought
of, to complete it by your industry, and then to grasp it in your
memory; to make it plain by your eloquence, and to support it with
voice and strength sufficient? 'Have I these gifts,' you will ask.
Would that I had! But from my childhood I have done all that I could
to attain them."[108]
Cicero makes his points so well that I would fain go through the whole
speech, were it not that a similar reason might induce me to give
abridgments of all his speeches. It may not be that the readers of
these orations will always sympathize with the orator in the matter
which he has in hand--though his power over words is so great as to
carry the reader with him very generally, even at this distance
of time--but the neatness with which the weapon is used, the
effectiveness of the thrust for the purpose intended, the certainty
with which the nail is hit on the head--never with an expenditure of
unnecessary force, but always with the exact strength wanted for the
purpose--these are the characteristics of Cicero's speeches which
carry the reader on with a delight which he will want to share with
others, as a man when he has heard a good story instantly wishes to
tell it again. And with Cicero we are charmed by the modernness, by
the tone of to-day, which his language takes. The rapid way in which
he runs from scorn to pity, from pity to anger, from anger to public
zeal, and then instantly to irony and ridicule, implies a lightness of
touch which, not unreasonably, surprises us as having endured for so
many hundred years. That poetry should remain to us, even lines so
vapid as some of those in which Ovid sung of love, seems to be more
natural, because verses, though they be light, must have been labored.
But these words spoken by Cicero seem almost to ring in our ears as
having come to us direct from a man's lips. We see the anger gathering
on the brow of Hortensius, followed by a look of acknowledged defeat.
We see the startled attention of the judges as they began to feel that
in this case they must depart from their intended purpose. We can
understand how Caecilius cowered, and found consolation in being
relieved from his task. We can fancy how Verres suffered--Verres
whom no shame could have touched--when all his bribes were becoming
inefficient under the hands of the orator.
Cicero was chosen for the task, and then the real work began. The
work as he did it was certainly beyond the strength of any ordinary
advocate. It was necessary that he should proceed to Sicily to obtain
the evidence which was to be collected over the whole island. He must
rate up, too, all the previous details of the life of this robber. He
must be thoroughly prepared to meet the schemers on every point. He
asked for a hundred and ten days for the purpose of getting up his
case, but he took only fifty. We must imagine that, as he became more
thoroughly versed in the intrigues of his adversaries, new lights came
upon him. Were he to use the whole time allotted to him, or even half
the time, and then make such an exposition of the criminal as he would
delight to do were he to indulge himself with that "perpetua oratio"
of which we hear, then the trial would be protracted till the coming
of certain public games, during which the courts would not sit. There
seem to have been three sets of games in his way--a special set for
this year, to be given by Pompey, which were to last fifteen days;
then the Ludi Romani, which were continued for nine days. Soon after
that would come the games in honor of Victory--so soon that an
adjournment over them would be obtained as a matter of course. In this
way the trial would be thrown over into the next year, when Hortensius
and one Metellus would be Consuls, and another Metellus would be the
Praetor, controlling the judgment-seats.
Pages:
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 | 10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27