---
title: "Against Verres · In Verrem"
author: "Cicero"
translator: "Charles Duke Yonge"
languages: [la, en]
shelf: "Classical Latin"
section: 11 of 31
url: https://scriptura.si/works/cicero-in-verrem/11/
cite: "Cicero, tr. Charles Duke Yonge, Against Verres · In Verrem, section 11. Scriptura (scriptura.si), https://scriptura.si/works/cicero-in-verrem/11/"
---

# Against Verres · In Verrem

*Cicero, tr. Charles Duke Yonge*

Cicero prosecutes the governor who plundered Sicily for three years: the first speech won the case, the five books of the second show Verres’ crimes one by one.

> Latin: ed. William Peterson, from the Perseus Digital Library (canonical-latinLit, phi0474.phi005, CC BY-SA 4.0).

> English: Charles Duke Yonge, from the Perseus Digital Library (phi0474.phi005.perseus-eng2). Notes are not included.

> Rows follow the references the two texts share (books, chapters and sections), cut where both reach the end of a sentence.

## 11. Actio Secunda · Book II · sections 100–133

Source: https://scriptura.si/works/cicero-in-verrem/11/ · cite a paragraph as https://scriptura.si/works/cicero-in-verrem/11/#p-N

[¶0] 100. At the very outset news was brought to him that the matter had been agitated in the senate, (which his father also had written him word of at great length,) that also in the public assembly Marcus Palicanus, a tribune of the people, had made a complaint to their of the treatment of Sthenius; lastly, that I myself had pleaded the cause of Sthenius before this college of the tribunes of the people, as by their edict no one was allowed to remain in Rome who had been condemned on a capital charge; and that when I had explained the business as I have now done to you, and had proved that this had no right to be considered a condemnation, the tribunes of the people passed this resolution, and that it was unanimously decreed by them, “That Sthenius did not appear to be prohibited by their edict from remaining in Rome.”

> Latin: 100. illi primis illis temporibus, id quod pater quoque ad eum pluribus verbis scripserat, agitatam rem esse in senatu; etiam in contione tribunum plebis de causa Stheni, M. Palicanum, esse questum; postremo me ipsum apud hoc collegium tribunorum plebis, cum eorum omnium edicto non liceret Romae quemquam esse qui rei capitalis condemnatus esset, egisse causam Stheni, et, cum ita rem exposuissem quem ad modum nunc apud vos, docuissemque hanc damnationem duci non oportere, x tribunos plebis hoc statuisse, idque de omnium sententia pronuntiatum esse, non videri Sthenivm lmpediri edicto qvo minvs ei Romae liceret esse.

[¶1] 101. When this news was brought to him, he for a while was alarmed and agitated; he turned the blunt end of his pen on to his tablets, and by so doing he overturned the whole of his cause. For he left himself nothing which could be defended by any means whatever. For if he were to urge in his defence, “It is lawful to take a charge against an absent man, no law forbids this being done in a province,” he would seem to be putting forth a faulty and worthless defence, but still it would be some sort of a defence. Lastly, he might employ that most desperate refuge, of saying, that he had acted ignorantly; that he had thought that it was lawful. And although this is the worst defence of all, still he would seem to have said something. He erases that from his tablets which he had put down, and enters “that the charge was brought against Sthenius while he was present.”

> Latin: 101. haec ad istum adferrentur, pertimuit aliquando et commotus est; vertit stilum in tabulis suis, quo facto causam omnem evertit suam; nihil enim sibi reliqui fecit quod defendi aliqua ratione posset. si ita defenderet, “nomen absentis licet; hoc fieri in provincia nulla lex vetat,” mala et improba defensione, verum aliqua tamen uti videretur; postremo illo desperatissimo perfugio uti posset, se imprudentem fecisse, existimasse id licere. haec perditissima defensio est, tamen aliquid dici videretur. ex tabulis id quod erat, et facit coram esse delatum.

[¶2] 102. Here consider in how many toils he involved himself; from which he could never disentangle himself. In the first place, he had often and openly declared himself in Sicily from his tribunal, and had asserted to many people in private conversation, that it was lawful to take a charge against an absent man; that he, for example, had done so himself—which he had. That he was in the habit of constantly saying this, was stated at the former pleading by Sextus Pompeius Chlorus, a man of whose virtue I have before spoken highly; and by Cnaeus Pompeius Theodorus, a man approved of by the judgment of that most illustrious man Cnaeus Pompeius in many most important affairs, and, by universal consent, a most accomplished person; and by Posides Matro of Solentum, a man of the highest rank, of the greatest reputation and virtue. And as many as you please will tell you the same thing at this present trial, both men who have heard it from his own mouth,—some of the leading men of our order,—and others too who were present when the accusation was taken against Sthenius in his absence. Moreover at Rome, when the matter was discussed in the senate, all his friends, and among them his own father, defended him on the ground of its being lawful so to act;—of its having been done constantly;—of his having done what he had done according to the example and established precedent of others.

> Latin: 102. videte in quot se laqueos induerit, quorum ex nullo se, iudices, umquam expediet. ipse in Sicilia saepe et palam de loco superiore dixerat et in sermone multis demonstrarat licere nomen recipere absentis; se exemplo fecisse quod fecisset. eum dictitasse priore actione et Sex. Pompeius Chlorus dixit, de cuius virtute antea commemoravi, et Cn. Pompeius Theodorus, homo et Cn. Pompei, clarissimi viri, iudicio plurimis maximisque in rebus probatissimus et omnium existimatione ornatissimus, et Posides Macro Soluntinus, homo summa nobilitate existimatione virtute ornatissimus, et hac actione quam voletis multi dicent, et qui ex isto ipso audierunt viri primarii nostri ordinis, et alii qui interfuerunt cum absentis nomen reciperetur. Romae, cum haec acta res esset in senatu, omnes istius amici, in his etiam pater eius hoc defendebat, licere fieri; saepe esse factum; iste quod fecisset aliorum exemplo institutoque fecisse.

[¶3] 103. Besides, all Sicily gives evidence of the fact which in the common petitions of all the states has prescribed this request to the consuls, “to beg and entreat of the conscript fathers, not to allow charges to be received against the absent.” Concerning which matter you heard Cnaeus Lentulus, the advocate of Sicily, and a most admirable young man, say, that the Sicilians, when they were instructing him in their case, and pointing out to him what matters were to be urged in their behalf before the senate, complained much of this misfortune of Sthenius, and on account of this injustice which had been done to Sthenius, resolved to make this demand which I have mentioned.

> Latin: 103. praeterea testimonium tota Sicilia, quae in communibus postulatis civitatum omnium consulibus edidit, rogare atque orare patres conscriptos ut statuerent ne absentium nomina reciperentur. de re Cn. Lentulum, patronum Siciliae, clarissimum adulescentem, dicere audistis, Siculos, cum se causam quae sibi in senatu pro his agenda esset docerent, de Stheni calamitate questos esse, propterque hanc iniuriam quae Sthenio facta esset eos statuisse ut hoc quod dico postularetur.

[¶4] 104. And as this is the ease, were you endued with such insanity and audacity, as, in a matter so clear, so thoroughly proved,—made so notorious even by you yourself, to dare to corrupt the public records? But how did you corrupt them? Did you not do it in such a way that, even if we all kept silence, still your own handwriting would be sufficient to condemn you? Give me, it you please, the document. Take it round to the judges; show it to them. Do you not see that the whole of this entry, where he states that the charge was made against Sthenius in his presence, is a correction? What was written there before? What blunder did he correct when he made that erasure? Why, O judges, do you wait for proofs of this charge from us? We say nothing; the books are before you, which cry out themselves that they have been tampered with and amended.

> Latin: 104. cum ita essent, tantane amentia praeditus atque audacia fuisti ut in re tam clara, tam testata, tam abs te ipso pervulgata tabulas publicas corrumpere auderes? quem ad modum corrupisti? nonne ita ut omnibus nobis tacentibus ipsae tuae te tabulae condemnare possent?, quaeso, codicem, circumfer, ostende. totum hoc nomen, coram ubi facit delatum, esse in litura? fuit istic antea scriptum? quod mendum ista litura correxit? a nobis, iudices, exspectatis argumenta huius criminis? dicimus; tabulae sunt in medio, quae se corruptas atque interlitas esse clamant.

[¶5] 105. Do you think you can possibly escape out of this business, when we are following you up, not by any uncertain opinion, but by your own traces, which you have left deeply printed and fresh in the public documents? Has he decided, (I should like to know,) without hearing the cause, that Sthenius has tampered with the public documents, who cannot possibly defend himself from the charge of having tampered with the public documents in the case of that very Sthenius?

> Latin: 105. istis etiam tu rebus effugere te posse confidis, cum te nos non opinione dubia, sed tuis vestigiis persequamur, quae tu in tabulis publicis expressa ac recentia reliquisti? mihi etiam Sthenium litteras publicas corrupisse causa incognita iudicavit, qui defendere non poterit se non in ipsius Stheni nomine litteras publicas corrupisse?

[¶6] 106. See now another instance of madness; see how, in trying to acquit himself; he entangles himself still more. He assigns an advocate to Sthenius.—Whom? Any relation or intimate friend? No.—Any citizen, any honourable and noble man of Florence? Not even that.—At least it was some Sicilian, in whom there was some credit and dignity? Far from it.—Whom then did he assign to him? A Roman citizen. Who can approve of this? When Sthenius was the man of the highest rank in his city, a man of most extensive connections, with numberless friends; when, besides, he was of the greatest influence all over Sicily, by his own personal character and popularity; could he find no Sicilian who was willing to be appointed his advocate? Will you approve of this? Did he himself prefer a Roman citizen? Tell me what Sicilian, when he was defendant in any action, ever had a Roman citizen assigned to him as his advocate? Produce the records of all the praetors who preceded Verres; open them. If you find one such instance, I will then admit to you that this was done as you have entered it in your public documents.

> Latin: 106. porro aliam amentiam; videte ut, dum expedire sese vult, induat. adscribit Sthenio—quem? cognatum aliquem aut propinquum?. Thermitanum aliquem, honestum hominem ac nobilem? id quidem. Siculum, in quo aliquis splendor dignitasque esset?. igitur? Romanum. hoc probari potest? esset Sthenius civitatis suae nobilissimus, amplissima cognatione, plurimis amicitiis, cum praeterea tota Sicilia multum auctoritate et gratia posset, invenire neminem Siculum potuit qui pro se cognitor fieret? probabis? ipse civem Romanum maluit? cui Siculo, cum is reus fieret, civis Romanus cognitor factus umquam sit. praetorum litteras qui ante te fuerunt profer, explica; si unum inveneris, ego hoc tibi, quem ad modum in tabulis scriptum habes, ita gestum esse concedam.

[¶7] 107. Oh but, I suppose, Sthenius thought it honourable to himself for Verres to choose a man for his advocate out of the number of Roman citizens who were his own friends and connections! Whom did he choose? Whose name is written in the records? Caius Claudius, the son of Caius, of the Palatine tribe. I do not ask who this Claudius is; how illustrious, how honourable, how well suited to the business, and deserving that, because of his influence and dignity, Sthenius should abandon the custom of all the Sicilians, and have a Roman citizen for his advocate. I do not ask any of these questions;—for perhaps Sthenius was influenced not by the high position of the man, but by his intimacy with him.—What? What shall we say if there was in the whole world a greater enemy to Sthenius than this very Caius Claudius, both constantly in old times, and especially at this time and in this affair?—if he appeared against him on the charge of tampering with the public documents?—if he opposed him by every means in his power? Which shall we believe,—that an enemy of Sthenius was actually appointed his advocate, or that you, at a time of the greatest danger to Sthenius, made free with the name of his enemy, to ensure his ruin?

> Latin: 107. , credo, Sthenius hoc sibi amplum putavit, eligere ex civium Romanorum numero, ex amicorum atque hospitum suorum copia, quem cognitorem daret. delegit? quis in tabulis scriptus est? C. Claudius C. F. Palatina. quaero quis hic sit Claudius, quam splendidus, quam honestus, quam idoneus propter cuius auctoritatem et dignitatem Sthenius ab omnium Siculorum consuetudine discederet et civem Romanum cognitorem daret. horum quaero; fortasse enim Sthenius non splendorem hominis, sed familiaritatem secutus est.? si omnium mortalium Sthenio nemo inimicior quam hic C. Claudius cum semper tum in his ipsis rebus et temporibus fuit, si de litteris corruptis contra venit, si contra omni ratione pugnavit, utrum potius pro Sthenio inimicum cognitorem esse factum an te ad Stheni periculum inimici eius nomine abusum esse credemus?

[¶8] 108. And that no one may have any doubt as to the real nature of the whole transaction, although I feel sure that by this time that man's rascality is pretty evident to you all, still listen yet a little longer. Do you see that man with curly hair, of a dark complexion, who is looking at us with such a countenance as shows that he seems to himself a very clever fellow? him, I mean, who has the papers in his hand—who is writing—who is prompting him—who is next to him. That is Caius Claudius, who in Sicily was considered Verres's agent and interpreter, the manager of all his dirty work, a sort of colleague to Timarchides. Now he is promoted so high that he scarcely seems to yield to Apronius in intimacy with him; indeed he called himself the colleague and ally not of Timarchides, but of Verres himself.

> Latin: 108. ne qui forte dubitet cuius modi hoc totum sit negotium, tametsi iam dudum omnibus istius improbitatem perspicuam esse confido, tamen paulum etiam attendite. illum subcrispo capillo, nigrum, qui eo vultu nos intuetur ut sibi ipse peracutus esse videatur, qui tabulas tenet, qui scribit, qui monet, qui proximus est. est Claudius, qui in Sicilia sequester istius, interpres, confector negotiorum, prope conlega Timarchidi numerabatur, nunc obtinet eum locum ut vix Apronio illi de familiaritate concedere videatur, ei qui se non Timarchidi sed ipsius Verris conlegam et socium esse dicebat.

[¶9] 109. Now doubt, if you can, that he chose that man of all the world to impose the worthless character of a false advocate on, whom he knew to be most hostile to Sthenius, and most friendly to himself. And will you hesitate in this case, O judges, to punish such enormous audacity and cruelty and injustice as that of this man? Will you hesitate to follow the example of those judges, who, when they had condemned Cnaeus Dolabella, rescinded the condemnation of Philodamus of Opus, because a charge had been received against him not in his absence, which is of all things the most unjust and the most intolerable, but after a commission had been given him by his fellow-citizens to proceed to Rome as their ambassador? That precedent which the judges, in obedience to the principles of equity, established in a less important cause, will you hesitate to adopt in a cause of the greatest consequence, especially now that it has been established by the authority of others?

> Latin: 109. etiam, si potestis, quin eum iste potissimum ex omni numero delegerit cui hanc cognitoris falsi improbam personam imponeret, quem et huic inimicissimum et sibi amicissimum esse arbitraretur! vos dubitabitis, iudices, tantam istius audaciam, tantam crudelitatem, tantam iniuriam vindicare? dubitabitis exemplum illorum iudicum sequi qui damnato Cn. Dolabella damnationem Philodami Opuntii resciderunt, quod is non absens reus factus esset, quae res iniquissima atque acerbissima est, sed cum ei legatio iam Romam a suis civibus esset data? illi iudices multo in leviore causa statuerunt aequitatem secuti, vos id statuere in gravissima causa, praesertim aliorum auctoritate iam confirmatum, dubitabitis?

[¶10] 110. But who was it, O Verres, whom you treated with such great, with such unexampled injustice? Against whom did you receive a charge in his absence? Whom did you condemn in his absence; not only without any crime, and without any witness, but even without any accuser? Who was it? O ye immortal gods! I will not say your own friend,—that which is the dearest title among men. I will not say your host,—which is the most holy name. There is nothing in Sthenius's case which I speak of less willingly. The only thing which I find it possible to blame him in is,—that he, a most moderate and upright man, invited you, a man full of adultery, and crime, and wickedness, to his house; that he, who had been and was connected by ties of hospitality with Caius Marius, with Cnaeus Pompeius, with Caius Marcellus, with Lucius Sisenna, your defender, and with other excellent citizens, added your name also to that of those unimpeachable men.

> Latin: 110. quem hominem, C. Verres, tanta tam insigni iniuria adfecisti? quem hominem absentem de litteris corruptis causa incognita condemnasti? cuius absentis nomen recepisti? quem absentem non modo sine crimine et sine teste, verum etiam sine accusatore damnasti? hominem? di immortales! non dicam amicum tuum, quod apud homines clarissimum est, non hospitem, quod sanctissimum est; nihil enim minus libenter de Sthenio commemoro, nihil aliud in eo quod reprehendi possit invenio nisi quod homo frugalissimus atque integerrimus te, hominem plenum stupri flagiti sceleris, domum suam invitavit, nisi quod, qui C. Mari, Cn. Pompei, C. Marcelli, L. Sisennae, tui defensoris, ceterorum virorum fortissimorum hospes fuisset atque esset, ad eum numerum clarissimorum hominum tuum quoque nomen adscripsit.

[¶11] 111. On which account I make no complaint of violated hospitality, and of your abominable wickedness in violating it; I say this not to those who know Sthenius,—that is to say, not to any one of those who have been in Sicily; (for no one who has is ignorant in how great authority he lived in his own city, in what great honour and consideration among all the Sicilians;) but I say it that those, too, who have not been in the province, may be able to understand who he was in whose case you established such a precedent, that both on account of the iniquity of the deed, as well as on account of the rank of the man, it appeared scandalous and intolerable to every one.

> Latin: 111. de hospitio violato et de tuo isto scelere nefario nil queror; hoc dico non iis qui Sthenium norunt, hoc est nemini eorum qui in Sicilia fuerunt,—nemo enim ignorat quo hic in civitate sua splendore, qua apud omnis Siculos dignitate atque existimatione sit; sed ut illi quoque qui in ea provincia non fuerunt intellegere possint in quo homine tu statueris exemplum eius modi, quod cum propter iniquitatem rei tum etiam propter hominis dignitatem acerbum omnibus atque intolerandum videretur.

[¶12] 112. Is not Sthenius the man, he who when he had very easily obtained all the honourable offices in his city, executed them with the greatest splendor, and magnificence?—who decorated a town, not itself of the first rank, with most spacious places of public resort, and most splendid monuments, at his own expense?—on account of whose good services towards the state of Thermae, and towards all the Sicilians, a brazen tablet was set up in the senate-house at Thermae; in which mention was made of his services, and engraved at the public expense?—which tablet was torn down under your government, and is now brought hither by me, that all may know the honour in which he was held among his countrymen, and his preeminent dignity.

> Latin: 112. Sthenius is qui, omnis honores domi suae facillime cum adeptus esset, amplissime ac magnificentissime gessit, qui oppidum non maximum maximis ex pecunia sua locis communibus monumentisque decoravit, cuius de meritis in rem publicam Thermitanorum Siculosque universos fuit aenea tabula fixa Thermis in curia, in qua publice erat de huius beneficiis scriptum et incisum? quae tabula tum imperio tuo revulsa, nunc a me tamen deportata est, ut omnes huius honores inter suos et amplitudinem possent cognoscere.

[¶13] 113. Is this the man, who when he was accused before that most illustrious man, Cnaeus Pompeius, and when his enemies and accusers charged him, in terms calculated to excite odium against him, rather than true, of having been ill affected to the republic on account of his intimacy and his connections of hospitality with Caius Marius, was acquitted by Cnaeus Pompeius with such language as showed that, from what had come out at that very trial, Cnaeus Pompeius judged him most worthy of his own intimacy? and moreover was defended and extolled by all the Sicilians in such a manner, that Pompeius thought that by his acquittal he had earned, not only the gratitude of the man himself, but that of the whole province? Lastly, is not he the man who had such affection towards the republic, and also such great authority among his fellow-citizens, that he alone in all Sicily, while you were praetor, did what not only no other Sicilian, but what all Sicily even could not do,—namely, prevented you from taking away any statue, any ornament, any sacred vessel, or any public property from Thermae; and that too when there were many remarkable beautiful things there, and though you coveted everything?

> Latin: 113. hic qui apud Cn. Pompeium, clarissimum virum, cum accusatus esset, quod propter C. Mari familiaritatem et hospitium contra rem publicam sensisse eum inimici et accusatores eius dicerent, cumque magis invidioso crimine quam vero arcesseretur, ita a Cn. Pompeio absolutus est ut in eo ipso iudicio Pompeius hunc hospitio suo dignissimum statueret? ita porro laudatus defensusque ab omnibus Siculis ut idem Pompeius non ab homine solum, sed etiam a provincia tota se huius absolutione inire gratiam arbitraretur? estne hic qui et animum in rem publicam habuit eius modi et tantum auctoritate apud suos civis potuit ut perficeret in Sicilia solus te praetore, quod non modo Siculus nemo sed ne Sicilia quidem tota potuisset, ut ex oppido Thermis nullum signum, nullum ornamentum, nihil ex sacro, nihil de publico attingeres, cum praesertim et essent multa praeclara et tu omnia concupisses?

[¶14] 114. See now, what a difference there is between you, in whose name days of festival are kept among the Sicilians, and those splendid Verrean games, are celebrated; to whom gilt statues are erected at Rome, presented by the commonwealth of Sicily, as we see inscribed upon them;—see, I say, what a difference there is between you and this Sicilian, who was condemned by you, the patron of Sicily. Him very many cities of Sicily praise by public resolutions in his favour, by their own evidence, by deputations went hither with that object. You, the patron of all the Sicilians, the solitary state of the Mamertini, the partner of your thefts and crimes, praises publicly; and yet in such a way that, by a new process, the deputies themselves injure your cause, though the deputation praises you. These other states all publicly accuse you, complain of you, impeach you by letters, by deputations, by evidence; and, if you are acquitted, think themselves utterly ruined.

> Latin: 114. nunc vide quid inter te, cuius nomine apud Siculos dies festi aguntur et praeclara illa Verria celebrantur, cui statuae Romae stant inauratae a communi Siciliae, quem ad modum inscriptum videmus, datae—vide, inquam, quid inter te et hunc Siculum, qui abs te est, patrono Siciliae, condemnatus, intersit. civitates ex Sicilia permultae testimonio suo legationibusque ad eam rem missis publice laudant: te, omnium Siculorum patronum, una Mamertina civitas, socia furtorum ac flagitiorum tuorum, publice laudat—ita tamen novo more ut legati laedant, legatio laudet—ceterae quidem civitates publice litteris legationibus testimoniis accusant, queruntur, arguunt: si tu absolutus sis, se funditus eversas esse arbitrantur.

[¶15] 115. It is in the case of this man and of his property that you have erected a monument of your crimes and cruelty even on Mount Eryx itself; on which is inscribed the name Sthenius of Thermae. I saw a Cupid made of silver, with a torch. What object had you,—what reason was there for employing the plunder of Sthenius on that subject rather than on any other? Did you wish it to be a token of your own cupidity, or a trophy of your friendship and connection of hospitality with him, or a proof of your love towards him? Men, who in their excelling wickedness are pleased not only with their lust and pleasure itself, but also with the fame of their wickedness, do wish to leave in many places the marks and traces of their crimes.

> Latin: 115. de homine ac de huius bonis etiam in Eryco monte monumentum tuorum [furtorum,] flagitiorum crudelitatisque posuisti, in quo Stheni Thermitani nomen adscriptum est. argenteum Cupidinem cum lampade. tandem habuit argumenti aut rationis res quam ob rem in eo potissimum Sthenianum praemium poneretur? utrum hoc signum cupiditatis tuae an tropaeum necessitudinis atque hospiti an amoris indicium esse voluisti? hoc homines quos in summa nequitia non solum libido et voluptas, verum etiam ipsius nequitiae fama delectet, ut multis in locis notas ac vestigia suorum flagitiorum relinqui velint.

[¶16] 116. He was burning with love of that hostess for whose sake he had violated the laws of hospitality. He wished that not only to be known, but also to be recorded for ever. And therefore, out of the proceeds of that very action which he had performed, Agathinus being the accuser, he thought that a reward was especially due to Venus, who had caused the prosecution and the whole proceeding. I should think you grateful to the Gods if you had given this gift to Venus, not out of the property of Sthenius, but out of your own, as you ought to have done, especially as an inheritance had come to you from Chelidon that very same year.

> Latin: 116. amore illius hospitae propter quam hospiti iura violarat; hoc non solum sciri tum, verum etiam commemorari semper volebat; itaque ex illa ipsa re quam accusante Agathino gesserat Veneri potissimum deberi praemium statuit, quae illam totam accusationem iudiciumque conflarat. te gratum in deos si hoc donum Veneri non de Stheni bonis dedisses, sed de tuis; quod facere debuisti, praesertim cum tibi illo ipso anno a Chelidone venisset hereditas.

[¶17] 117. On these grounds now, even if I had not undertaken this cause at the request of all the Sicilians; if the whole province had not requested this favour of me; if my affection and love for the republic, and the injury done to the credit of our order and of the courts of justice, had not compelled me to do so; and if this had been my only reason, that you had so cruelly, and wickedly, and abominably treated my friend and connection Sthenius, to whom I had formed an extraordinary attachment in my quaestorship, of whom I had the highest possible opinion, whom while I was in the province I knew to be most zealous and earnest for my reputation,—I should still think I had plenty of reason to incur the enmity of a most worthless man, in order to defend the safety and fortunes of my friend.

> Latin: 117. ego, si hanc causam non omnium Siculorum rogatu recepissem, si hoc a me muneris non universa provincia poposcisset, si me animus atque amor in rem publicam existimatioque offensa nostri ordinis ac iudiciorum non hoc facere coegisset, atque haec una causa fuisset quod amicum atque hospitem meum Sthenium, quem ego in quaestura mea singulariter dilexissem, de quo optime existimassem, quem in provincia existimationis meae studiosissimum cupidissimumque cognossem, tam crudeliter scelerate nefarieque tractasses, tamen digna causa videretur cur inimicitias hominis improbissimi susciperem, ut hospitis salutem fortunasque defenderem.

[¶18] 118. Many men have done the same in the times of our ancestors. Lately, too, that most eminent man Cnaeus Domitius did so, who accused Marcus Silanus, a man of consular rank, on account of the injuries done by him to Egritomarus of the Transalpine country, his friend. I should think it became me to follow the example of their good feeling and regard for their duty; and I should hold out hope to my friends and connections to think that they would live a safer life owing to my protection. But when the cause of Sthenius draws along with it the common calamity of the whole province, and when many of my friends and connections are being defended by me at the same time, both in their public and private interests, I ought not in truth to fear that any one can suppose that I have done what I have in undertaking this cause under the pressure and compulsion of any motive except that of the strictest duty. And that we may at last give up speaking of the investigations made, and the judicial proceedings conducted, and of the decisions given by that man; and as his exploits of that class are countless, let us put some bounds and limits to our speech and accusation. We will take a few cases of another sort.

> Latin: 118. hoc multi apud maiores nostros, fecit etiam nuper homo clarissimus, Cn. Domitius, qui M. Silanum, consularem hominem, accusavit propter Aegritomari Transalpini hospitis iniurias. me idoneum qui exemplum sequerer humanitatis atque offici, proponeremque spem meis hospitibus ac necessariis quo tutiorem sese vitam meo praesidio victuros esse arbitrarentur; cum vero in communibus iniuriis totius provinciae Stheni quoque causa contineatur, multique uno tempore a me hospites atque amici publice privatimque defendantur, profecto vereri non debeo ne quis hoc quod facio non existimet me summi offici ratione impulsum coactumque suscepisse. ut aliquando de rebus ab isto cognitis iudicatisque et de iudiciis datis dicere desistamus, et, quoniam facta istius in his generibus infinita sunt, nos modum aliquem et finem orationi nostrae criminibusque faciamus, pauca ex aliis generibus sumemus.

[¶19] 119. You have heard Quintus Varius say, that his agents paid that man a hundred and thirty thousand sesterces for a decision in his cause. You recollect that the evidence of Quintus Varius was corroborated, and that this whole affair was proved by the testimony of Caius Sacerdos, a most excellent man. You know that Cnaeus Sertius and Marcus Modius, Roman knights, and that six hundred Roman citizens besides, and many Sicilians, said that they had given that money for decisions in their causes. And why need I dilate upon this accusation when the whole matter is set plainly forth in the evidence? Why should I argue about what no one can doubt? Or will any man in the world doubt that he set up his judicial decisions for sale in Sicily, when at Rome he sold his very edict and all his decrees? and that he received money from the Sicilians in issuing extraordinary decrees, when he actually made a demand on Marcus Octavius Ligur for giving a decision on his cause?

> Latin: 119. Audistis ob ius dicendum Q. Varium dicere procuratores suos isti centum triginta milia nummum dedisse, meministis Q. Vari testimonium, remque hanc totam C. Sacerdotis, hominis ornatissimi, testimonio comprobari, scitis Cn. Sertium, M. Modium, equites Romanos, sescentos praeterea civis Romanos multosque Siculos dixisse se isti pecuniam ob ius dicendum dedisse. quo crimine quid ego disputem, cum id totum positum sit in testibus? quid porro argumenter, qua de re dubitare nemo possit? hoc dubitabit quisquam omnium, quin is venalem in Sicilia iuris dictionem habuerit qui Romae totum edictum atque omnia decreta vendiderit? et quin is ab Siculis ob decreta interponenda pecunias ceperit, qui M. Octavium Ligurem pecuniam ob ius dicendum poposcerit?

[¶20] 120. For what method of extorting money did he ever omit? What method did he fail to devise, even if it had escaped the notice of every one else? Was anything in the Sicilian states ever sought to be obtained in which there is any honour, any power, or any authority, that you did not make it a source of your own gain, and sell it to the best bidder? At the former pleading evidence was given of both a public and a private nature; deputies from Centuripa, from Halesa, from Catina, and from Panormus, and from many other cities gave evidence; but now, also, a great many private individuals have been examined, by whose testimony you have ascertained that no one in all Sicily for the space of three years was ever made senator in any city for nothing,—no one by vote, as their laws prescribe,—no one except by his command, or by his letters; and that in the appointment of all these senators, not only were no votes given, but there was not even any consideration of those families from which it was lawful to select men for that body, nor of their income, nor of their age; nor were any other of the Sicilian laws of the slightest influence.

> Latin: 120. enim iste praeterea genus pecuniae cogendae praeteriit? quod non ab omnibus aliis praeteritum excogitavit? ecqua res apud civitates Siculas expetitur, in qua aut honos aliquis sit aut potestas aut procuratio, quin eam rem tu ad tuum quaestum nundinationemque hominum traduxeris? Dicta sunt priore actione et privatim et publice testimonia; legati Centuripini, Halaesini, Catinenses, Panhormitanique dixerunt, multarum praeterea civitatum, iam vero privatim plurimi. ex testimoniis cognoscere potuistis tota Sicilia per triennium neminem ulla in civitate senatorem factum esse gratiis, neminem, ut leges eorum sunt, suffragiis, neminem nisi istius imperio aut litteris; atque in his omnibus senatoribus cooptandis non modo suffragia nulla fuisse, sed ne genera quidem spectata esse ex quibus in eum ordinem cooptari liceret, neque census neque aetates neque cetera Siculorum iura valuisse;

[¶21] 121. Whoever wished to be made a senator, though he was a boy, though he was unworthy, though he was of a class from which it was not lawful to take senators; still, if he paid money enough to appear in his eyes a fit man to gain his object, so it always was. Not only the laws of the Sicilians had no influence in this matter, but even those which had been given to them by the senate and people of Rome had none either. For the laws which he makes who has the supreme command given to him by the Roman people, and authority to make laws conferred on him by the senate, ought to be considered the laws of the senate and people of Rome.

> Latin: 121. quicumque senator voluerit fieri, quamvis puer, quamvis indignus, quamvis ex eo loco ex quo non liceret, si is pretio apud istum [idoneus] vinceret, factum esse semper; non modo Siculorum nihil in hac re valuisse leges, sed ne ab senatu quidem populoque Romano datas. enim leges sociis amicisque dat is qui habet imperium a populo Romano, auctoritatem legum dandarum ab senatu, eae debent et populi Romani et senatus existimari.

[¶22] 122. The citizens of Halesa, who were till lately in the enjoyment of their own laws, in return for the numerous and great services and good deeds done both by themselves and by their ancestors to our republic, lately in the consulship of Lucius Licinius and Quintus Mucius, requested laws from our senate, as they had disputes among themselves about the elections into their senate. The senate, by a very honourable decree, voted that Caius Claudius Pulcher, the son of Appius the praetor, should give them laws to regulate their elections into their senate. Caius Claudius, taking as his counselors all the Marcelli who were then alive, with their advice gave laws to the men of Halesa in which he laid down many rules about the age of the men who might be elected; that no one might be under thirty years of age; about trade,—that no one engaged in it might be elected; about their income, and about all other matters; all which regulations prevailed till that man became praetor by the authority of our magistrates, and with the cordial good-will of the men of Halesa. But from him even a crier who was desirous of it, bought that rank for a sum of money, and boys sixteen and seventeen years old purchased the title of senator; and that which the men of Halesa, our most ancient and faithful allies and friends, had petitioned, and that successfully, at Rome, to have put on such a footing that it might not be lawful for men to be elected even by vote, he now made easy to be obtained by bribery.

> Latin: 122. Halaesini pro multis ac magnis suis maiorumque suorum in rem publicam nostram meritis atque beneficiis suo iure nuper, L. Licinio Q. Mucio consulibus, cum haberent inter se controversias de senatu cooptando, leges ab senatu nostro petiverunt. senatus honorifico senatus consulto ut iis C. Claudius Appi filius praetor de senatu cooptando leges conscriberet. C. Claudius, adhibitis omnibus Marcellis qui tum erant, de eorum sententia leges Halaesinis dedit, in quibus multa sanxit de aetate hominum, ne qui minor xxx annis natus, de quaestu, quem qui fecisset ne legeretur, de censu, de ceteris rebus: quae omnia ante istum praetorem et nostrorum magistratuum auctoritate et Halaesinorum summa voluntate valuerunt. isto et praeco, qui voluit, illum ordinem pretio mercatus est, et pueri annorum senum septenumque denum senatorium nomen nundinati sunt; et quod Halaesini, antiquissimi et fidelissimi socii atque amici, Romae impetrarant, ut apud se ne suffragiis quidem fieri liceret, id pretio ut fieri posset effecit.

[¶23] 123. The people of Agrigentum have old laws about appointing their senate, given them by Scipio, in which the same principles are laid down, and this one besides,—as there are two classes of Agrigentines, one of the old inhabitants, and the other of the new,—settlers whom Titus Manlius, when praetor, had led from other towns of the Sicilians to Agrigentum, in obedience to a resolution of the senate;—it was provided in the laws of Scipio, that there should not be a greater number of members of the senate taken from the class of settlers than from the old inhabitants of Agrigentum. That man, who had levelled all laws by bribery, and who had taken away all distinction between things for money, not only disturbed all those regulations which related to age, rank, and traffic, but even with respect to these two classes of old and new inhabitants, he disturbed the proportion of their selection.

> Latin: 123. Agrigentini de senatu cooptando Scipionis leges antiquas habent, in quibus et illa eadem sancta sunt et hoc amplius: cum Agrigentinorum duo genera sint, unum veterum, alterum colonorum quos T. Manlius praetor ex senatus consulto de oppidis Siculorum deduxit Agrigentum, cautum est in Scipionis legibus ne plures essent in senatu ex colonorum numero quam ex vetere Agrigentinorum., qui omnia iura pretio exaequasset omniumque rerum dilectum atque discrimen pecunia sustulisset, non modo illa quae erant aetatis ordinis quaestusque permiscuit, sed etiam in his duobus generibus civium novorum veterumque turbavit.

[¶24] 124. For when a senator died of the old inhabitants, and when the remaining number of each class was equal, it was necessary, according to the laws, that one of the original inhabitants should be elected in order that there might be the larger number. And though this was the case, still, not only some of the original inhabitants, but also some of the new settlers, came to him to purchase the rank of senator. The result is, that through bribery, one of the new men carries the day, and gets letters of appointment from the praetor. The Agrigentines send deputies to him to inform him of their laws, and to explain to him the invariable usage of past years, in order that he might be aware that he had sold that rank to one with whom he had no right even to treat on the subject. By whose speech, as he had already received the money, he was not in the least influenced.

> Latin: 124. cum esset ex vetere numero quidam senator demortuus, et cum ex utroque genere par numerus reliquus esset, veterem cooptari necesse erat legibus, ut is amplior numerus esset. cum ita se res haberet, tamen ad istum emptum venerunt illum locum senatorium non solum veteres, verum etiam novi. ut pretio novus vincat litterasque a praetore adferat Agrigentum. Agrigentini ad istum legatos mittunt qui eum leges doceant consuetudinemque omnium annorum demonstrent, ut iste intellegeret ei se illum locum vendidisse cui ne commercium quidem esse oporteret; quorum oratione iste, cum pretium iam accepisset, ne tantulum quidem commotus est.

[¶25] 125. He did the same thing at Heraclea. For thither also Publius Rupilius led settlers and gave them similar laws about the appointment of the senate, and about the number of the old and new senators. There he did not only receive money, as he did in the other cities, but he even confused the class of the original inhabitants and of the new settlers. Do not wait for me to go through all the cities of Sicily in my speech. In this one statement I comprehend everything,—that no one could be made a senator while he was praetor except those who had given him money.

> Latin: 125. fecit Heracleae. eo quoque colonos P. Rupilius deduxit, legesque similis de cooptando senatu et de numero veterum ac novorum dedit. non solum iste ut apud ceteros pecuniam accepit, sed etiam genera veterum ac novorum numerumque permiscuit. exspectare dum omnis obeam oratione mea civitates: hoc uno complector omnia, neminem isto praetore senatorem fieri potuisse nisi qui isti pecuniam dedisset.

[¶26] 126. And I carry on the same charge to all magistracies, agencies, and priesthoods; by which acts he has not only trampled on the laws of men, but on all the religious reverence due to the immortal gods. There is at Syracuse a law respecting their religion, which enjoins a priest of Jupiter to be taken by lot every year; and that priesthood is considered among the Syracusans as the most honourable.

> Latin: 126. idem transfero in magistratus, curationes, sacerdotia; quibus in rebus non solum hominum iura, sed etiam deorum immortalium religiones omnis repudiavit. Syracusis lex est de religione, quae in annos singulos Iovis sacerdotem sortito capi iubeat, quod apud illos amplissimum sacerdotium putatur:

[¶27] 127. When three men have been selected by vote out of the three classes of citizens, the matter is decided by lot. He by his absolute command had contrived to have his intimate friend Theomnastus returned among the three by vote. When it came to the decision by lot, which he could not command, men were waiting to see what he would do. The fellow at first forbade them to elect by lot, as that seemed the easiest way, and ordered Theomnastus to be appointed without casting lots. The Syracusans say that cannot possibly be done, according to the reverence due to their sacred laws; they say it would be impious. He orders the law to be read to him. It is read. In it was written, “that as many lots were to be thrown into the urn as there were names returned; that he whose name was drawn was to have the priesthood.” He then, ingenious and clever man! said, “Capital! it is written, ‘As many lots as there are names returned;’ how many names then were returned?” It is answered, “Three.” “Is there then anything necessary except that three lots should be put in, and one drawn out?” “Nothing.” He orders three lots to be put in, on all of which was written the name of Theomnastus. A great outcry arises as it seemed to every one a scandalous and infamous proceeding. And so by these means that most honourable priesthood is given to Theomnastus.

> Latin: 127. cum suffragiis tres ex tribus generibus creati sunt, res revocatur ad sortem. iste imperio ut pro suffragio Theomnastus, familiaris suus, in tribus illis renuntiaretur: in sorte, cui imperare non potuerat, exspectabant homines quidnam acturus esset., id quod erat facillimum, primo vetat sortiri: iubet extra sortem Theomnastum renuntiari. id Syracusani per religiones sacrorum ullo modo fieri posse, fas denique negant esse. iste sibi legem recitari.; in qua scriptum erat ut, quot essent renuntiati, tot in hydriam sortes conicerentur; cuium nomen exisset, ut is haberet id sacerdotium. homo ingeniosus et peracutus, “,” inquit, “nempe scriptum ita est, qvot renvntiati ervnt. ergo, inquit, sunt renuntiati?”, “.” “igitur oportet nisi tres sortis conici, unam educi?” “.” iubet tres, in quibus omnibus esset inscriptum nomen Theomnasti. clamor maximus, cum id universis indignum ac nefarium videretur. Iovis illud sacerdotium amplissimum per hanc rationem Theomnasto datur.

[¶28] 128. At Cephalaedium there is a regular month, in which the pontifex is bound to be appointed. A man of the name of Artemo, surnamed Climachias, was desirous of that honour a man of sufficient riches to be sure, and of noble family; but he could not possibly have been appointed if a man of the name of Herodotus had been present. For that place and rank was thought to be so decidedly due to him for that year, that even Climachias could say nothing against him. The matter is referred to Verres, and is decided according to his usual fashion. Some beautiful and valuable specimens of carving are removed from Artemo's. Herodotus was at Rome; he thought that he should arrive in time enough for the comitia if he came the day before. Verres, in order that the comitia might not be held in any other month than the regular one, and that the honour might not be refused to Herodotus when he was present, (a thing which he was not anxious for, and which Climachias was very eager to avoid,) contrives, (I have said before, there is no one cleverer, and never was, in his way,)—he contrives, I say, how the comitia may be held in the regular month for them, and yet Herodotus may not be able to be present.

> Latin: 128. Cephaloedi mensis est certus, quo mense sacerdotem maximum creari oporteat. eius honoris cupidus Artemo quidam, Climachias cognomine, homo sane locuples et domi nobilis. is fieri nullo modo poterat si Herodotus quidam adesset: ei locus ille atque honos in illum annum ita deberi putabatur ut ne Climachias quidem contra diceret. ad istum defertur et istius more deciditur: toreumata sane nota et pretiosa auferuntur. Herodotus Romae erat; satis putabat se ad comitia tempore venturum si pridie venisset., ne aut alio mense ac fas erat comitia haberentur, aut Herodoto praesenti honos adimeretur, (id quod iste non laborabat, Climachias minime volebat), excogitat—dixi iam dudum, non est homo acutior quisquam nec fuit—excogitat, inquam, quem ad modum mense illo legitimo comitia haberentur nec tamen Herodotus adesse posset.

[¶29] 129. It is a custom of the Sicilians, and of the rest of the Greeks, because they wish their days and months to agree with the calculations as to the sun and moon, if there be any difference sometimes to take out a day, or, at most, two days from a month, which they call e)caire/simoi. And so also they sometimes make a month longer by a day or by two days. And when he heard of that, he, this new astronomer, who was thinking not so much of the heavens as of the heavy plate, he orders (not a day to be taken out of the month, but) a month and a half to be taken out of the year; so that the day which, as one may say, ought to have been the thirteenth of January, became the first of March. And that is done in spite of the remonstrances and indignation of every one. That was the legitimate day for holding the comitia. On that day Climachias is declared to have been elected priest.

> Latin: 129. consuetudo Siculorum ceterorumque Graecorum, quod suos dies mensisque congruere volunt cum solis lunaeque ratione, ut non numquam, si quid discrepet, eximant unum aliquem diem aut summum biduum ex mense, quos illi exaeresimos dies nominant; item non numquam uno die longiorem mensem faciunt aut biduo. cum iste cognosset novus astrologus, qui non tam caeli rationem quam caelati argenti duceret, eximi iubet non diem ex mense, sed ex anno unum dimidiatumque mensem hoc modo ut, quo die verbi causa esse oporteret Idus Ianuarias, is eo die Kalendas Martias proscribi iuberet: itaque fit omnibus recusantibus et plorantibus. is erat legitimus comitiis habendis. modo sacerdos Climachias renuntiatus est.

[¶30] 130. When Herodotus returns from Rome, fifteen days, as he supposed, before the comitia, he comes on the month of the comitia, when the comitia have been held thirty days before. Then the people of Cephalaedium voted an intercalary month of forty-five days, in order that the rest of the months might fall again into their proper season. If these things could be done at Rome, no doubt he would somehow or other have contrived to have the forty-five days between the two sets of games taken away, during which days alone this trial could take place.

> Latin: 130. Herodotus cum Roma revertitur, diebus, ut ipse putabat, xv ante comitia, offendit eum mensem qui consequitur mensem comitialem, comitiis iam abhinc xxx diebus factis. Cephaloeditani fecerunt intercalarium xxxxv dies longum, ut reliqui menses in suam rationem reverterentur. si Romae fieri posset, certe aliqua ratione expugnasset iste ut dies xxxxv inter binos ludos tollerentur, per quos solos iudicium fieri posset.

[¶31] 131. But now it is worth while to see how the censors were appointed in Sicily while that man was praetor. For that is the magistracy among the Sicilians, the appointments to which are made by the people with the greatest care, because all the Sicilians pay a yearly tax in proportion to their incomes; and, in making the census, the power is entrusted to the censor of making every sort of valuation, and of determining the total amount of every man's contribution. Therefore the people choose with the greatest care the man in whom they can place the greatest confidence in a matter affecting their own property; and on account of the greatness of the power, this magistracy is an object of the greatest ambition.

> Latin: 131. vero censores quem ad modum isto praetore in Sicilia creati sint, operae pretium est cognoscere. enim est magistratus apud Siculos qui diligentissime mandatur a populo propter hanc causam, quod omnes Siculi ex censu quotannis tributa conferunt, in censu habendo potestas omnis aestimationis habendae summaeque faciendae censori permittitur. et populus cui maximam fidem suarum rerum habeat maxima cura deligit, et propter magnitudinem potestatis hic magistratus a populo summa ambitione contenditur.

[¶32] 132. In such a matter, Verres did not choose to do any thing obscurely, nor to play tricks in the drawing of lots, nor to take days out of the calendar. He did not choose to do anything in an underhand manner, or by means of artifice; but in order to take away the fondness and desire for honours and ambition out of every city, feelings which usually tend to the ruin of a state, he declared that he should appoint the censors in every city.

> Latin: 132. ea re iste nihil obscure facere voluit, non in sortitione fallere neque dies de fastis eximere. sane vafre nec malitiose facere conatus est; sed ut studia cupiditatesque honorum atque ambitiones ex omnibus civitatibus tolleret, quae res evertendae rei publicae solent esse, ostendit sese in omnibus civitatibus censores esse facturum.

[¶33] 133. When the praetor announced so vast a scene of bargaining and trafficking as that, people came to Syracuse to see him, from all quarters. The whole of the praetor's house was on fire with the eagerness and cupidity of men; and no wonder, when all the comitia of so many cities were packed together into one house, and when all the ambition of an entire province was confined in one chamber. Bribes being openly asked for, and biddings being openly made, Timarchides appointed two censors for every city. He, by his own labour, and by his own visits to every one, by all the trouble which he took in this employment, achieved this, that all the money came to Verres without his having any anxiety on his part. How much money this Timarchides made, you cannot as yet know; for a certainty; but in what a variety of manners, and how shamefully, he plundered people, you heard at the former pleading, by the evidence of many witnesses.

> Latin: 133. mercatu praetoris indicto concurritur undique ad istum Syracusas; flagrabat domus tota praetoria studio hominum et cupiditate; nec mirum omnibus comitiis tot civitatum unam in domum revocatis, tantaque ambitione provinciae totius in uno cubiculo inclusa. palam pretiis et licitationibus factis, discribebat censores binos in singulas civitates Timarchides. suo labore suisque accessionibus huius negoti atque operis molestia consequebatur ut ad istum sine ulla sollicitudine summa pecuniae referretur. hic Timarchides quantam pecuniam fecerit plane adhuc cognoscere non potuistis; verum tamen priore actione quam varie, quam improbe praedatus esset, multorum testimoniis cognovistis.