[81]
Wherefore, all party feeling being now out of the question, for time
has removed that, my oration has begged you to dismiss it from your minds, and your good faith
and justice has discarded it from an inquiry into truth; it is there besides in the cause that
remains in doubt?
It is perfectly notorious that bribery was practiced or attempted at that trial. The
question is, By whom was it practiced; by the prosecutor, or by the defendant? The prosecutor
says, “In the first place, I was prosecuting him on the most serious charges, so
that I had no need of bribery; in the second place, I was prosecuting a man who was already
condemned, so that he could not have been saved even by bribery; and lastly, even if he had
been acquitted, my position and my fortune would have been uninjured by his
acquittal.” What does the defendant say, on the other hand? “In the first
place, I was alarmed at the very number and atrocity of the charges; in the second place, I
felt that, after the Fabricii had been condemned on account of their being privy to my
wickedness, I was condemned myself; lastly, I was in such a condition that my whole position
and all my fortunes depended entirely on that one trial, from which I was in
danger.”
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.