[59]
Continue, now, to follow up the examination of this interdict. “With men collected
together.” Suppose you collected none, but they all came together of their own
accord. Certainly he does collect men together who assembles men and invites them. Those men
are collected who are brought together by any one into one place; if they not only were never
invited, but if they did not even assemble on purpose at all; if there was no one there who
was not there previously, not for the purpose of committing violence? but because they were
used to be there for the sake of tilling the ground or tending the flocks. You will urge in
your defence that men were not collected; and, as far as mere words go, you will gain your
cause, even if I myself am the judge; but as to facts, you will have no ground to stand on
before any judge whatever. For the intention of our legislators was, that restitution should
he made in cases where violence had been committed by a multitude, and not by a multitude only
if expressly collected for the purpose; but because generally, if there is need of a
multitude, men are used to be collected, therefore, the interdict has been framed so as
expressly to mention men when collected. And even if there does seem to be any verbal
difference, the fact is the same, and the same rule will apply in all cases in which the
principle of justice is seen to be one and the same. “Or armed.”
This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.