[9]
Aulus Cluentius is said to have corrupted a tribunal with money, in order to procure the
condemnation of his innocent enemy, Statius Albius. I will prove, O judges, in the first
place, (since that is the principal wickedness charged against him, and the chief pretext for
casting odium upon him, that an innocent man was condemned through the influence of in your
minds whether I have money,) that no one was ever brought before a court on heavier charges,
or with more unimpeachable witnesses against him to prove them. In the second place, that a
previous examination into the matter had been made by the very same judges who afterwards
condemned him, with such a result that he could not possibly have been acquitted, not only by
them, but by any other imaginable tribunal. When I have demonstrated this, then I will prove
that point which I am aware is particularly indispensable, that that tribunal was indeed
tampered with, not by Cluentius, but by the party hostile to Cluentius; and I will enable you
to see clearly in the whole of that cause what the facts really were—what mistake
gave rise to—and what had its origin in the unpopularity undeservedly stirred up
against Cluentius.
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.