[113]
At least you think that the decision was
not a corrupt one. But he had condemned him; but he had not heard the entire case; but he had
been greatly and repeatedly annoyed at every assembly of the people, by Lucius Quinctius. Then
the whole of Quinctius's judicial conduct was unjust, deceitful, fraudulent, turbulent,
dictated by a wish for popularity, seditious. Be it so; Falcula may have been innocent. Well
then, some one condemned Oppianicus without being paid for it; Junius did not appoint men as judges in the place of the others, to condemn him
for a bribe. It is possible that there may have been some one who did not sit as judge from
the beginning, and who, nevertheless, condemned Oppianicus without having been bribed to do
so. But if Falcula was innocent, I wish to know who was guilty? If he condemned him without
being bribed to do so, who was bribed? I say that there has been nothing imputed to any one of
these men which was not imputed to Fidiculanius; I say that there was nothing in the case of
Fidiculanius which did not also exist in the case of the rest.
This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
M. Tullius Cicero. The Orations of Marcus Tullius Cicero, literally translated by C. D. Yonge, B. A. London. Henry G. Bohn, York Street, Covent Garden. 1856.
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
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.