[67]
Wherefore, to return to the subject which I began to speak of; take away the name of Cato
out of the cause; remove and leave out of the question all mention of authority, which in
courts of justice ought either to have no influence at all, or only influence to contribute to
someone's safety; and discuss with me the charges themselves. What do you accuse him of, Cato?
What action of his is it that you bring before the court? What is your charge? Do you accuse
him of bribery? I do not defend bribery. You blame me because you say I am defending the very
conduct which I brought in a law to punish. I punished bribery, not innocence. And any real
ease of bribery I will join you in prosecuting if you please. You have said that a resolution
of the senate was passed, on my motion, “that if any men who had been bribed had
gone to meet the candidates, if any hired men followed them, if places were given men to see
the shows of gladiators according to their tribes, and also, if dinners were given to the
common people, that appeared to be a violation of the Calpurnian law.” Therefore the
senate decides that these things were done in violation of the Calpurnian law if they were
done at all it decides what there is not the least occasion for out of complaisance for the
candidates. For there is a great question whether such things have been done or not. That if
they have been done, they were done in violation of the law, no one can doubt.
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.