1.
I have observed, O judges, that the whole speech of the accuser is divided into two parts,
one of which appeared to me to rely upon, and to put its main trust in, the inveterate
unpopularity of the trial before Junius; 1 the other, just for
the sake of usage, to touch very lightly and diffidently On the method pursued in cases of
accusations of poisoning; concerning which matter this form of trial is appointed by law. And,
therefore, I have determined to preserve the same division of the subject in my defence,
speaking separately to the question of unpopularity and to that of the accusation, in order
that every one may understand that I neither wish to evade any point by being silent with
respect to it, nor to make anything obscure by speaking of it.
[2]
But when I consider how much pains I must take with each branch of the question, one
division—that, namely, which is the proper subject of your inquiry, the question of
the fact of the poisoning—appears to me a very short one, and one which is not
likely to give occasion to any great dispute. But with the other division, which, properly, is
almost entirely unconnected with the case, and which is better adapted to assemblies in a
state of seditious excitement, than to tranquil and orderly courts of justice, I shall, I can
easily see, have a great deal of difficulty in dealing, and a great deal of trouble.
[3]
But in all this embarrassment, O judges, this thing still
consoles me,—that you have been accustomed to hear accusations under the idea that
you will afterwards hear their refutation from the advocate; that you are bound not to give
the defendant more advantages towards ensuring his acquittal, than his counsel can procure for
him by clearing him of the charges brought against him, and by proving his innocence in his
speech. But as regards the odium into which they seek to bring him, you ought to deliberate
together, considering not what is said by us, but what ought to be said. For while we are
dealing with the accusations, it is only the safety of Aulus Cluentius that is at stake; but
by the odium sought to be excited against him, the common safety of all men is imperilled.
Accordingly, we will treat one division of the case as men who are giving you information, and
the other division, as men who are addressing entreaties to you. In the first division we must
beg of you to give us your diligent attention; in the second, we must implore the protection
of your good faith. There is no one who can withstand the popular feeling when excited against
him without the assistance of you and of men like you.
[4]
As
far as I myself am concerned. I hardly know which way to turn. Shall I deny that there is any
ground for the disgraceful accusation, —that the judges were corrupted at the
previous trial? Shall I deny that that matter has been agitated at assemblies of the people?
that it has been brought before the courts of justice? that it has been mentioned in the
senate? Can I eradicate that belief from men's minds? a belief so deeply implanted in
them—so long established. It is out of the power of my abilities to do so. It is a
matter requiring your aid, O judges; it becomes you to come to the assistance of the innocence
of this man attacked by such a ruinous calumny, as you would in the case of a destructive fire
or of a general conflagration.
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.