|
|
MRAP Directory 02
Page 08
Caius Gracchus had taken very little part in public affairs since his brother's death. He had spoken only twice in public: once in favor of the law of Carbo for the re-election of Tribunes, and a second time in opposition to the Alien Act of Junius Pennus, as already mentioned. But the eyes of the people were naturally turned toward him. His abilities were known, and the Senate dreaded his return to Rome. He had been already two years in Sardinia, and they now attempted to retain him there another year by sending fresh troops to the province, and by commanding the Proconsul to remain in the island. But Caius suddenly appeared at Rome, to the surprise of all parties (B.C. 124). His enemies brought him before the Censors to account for his conduct, but he defended himself so ably that not only was no stigma put upon him, but he was considered to have been very badly used. He showed that he had served in the army twelve years, though required to serve only ten; that he had acted as Quaestor two years, though the law demanded only one year's service; and he added that he was the only soldier who took out with him a full purse and brought it back empty.
These consisted: (1.) Of the citizens of the thirty-three Tribes into which the Roman territory was now divided, and which extended north of the Tiber a little beyond Veii, and southward as far as the Liris; though even in this district there were some towns, such as Tibur and Praeneste, which did not possess the Roman franchise. (2.) Of the citizens of Roman colonies planted in different parts of Italy. (3.) Of the citizens of municipal towns upon whom the Roman franchise was conferred. In some cases the Roman franchise was granted without the right of voting in the Comitia (_civitas sine suffragio_), but in course of time this right also was generally conceded.
The king was no longer excommunicate, but the kingdom was still under the interdict, and the pope had no intention of annulling it until the question of compensation for their losses was settled to the satisfaction of the bishops and others whose lands had been in the hands of the king. That was not an easy question to settle. It was not a matter of arrears of revenue merely, for John had not been content with the annual income of the lands, but he had cut down forests and raised money in other extraordinary ways to the permanent injury of the property. In the end only a comparatively small sum was paid, and in all probability a full payment would have been entirely beyond the resources of the king, but at the beginning John seems to have intended to carry out his agreement in good faith. There is no reason to doubt the statement of a chronicler of the time that on the next day after his absolution the king sent out writs to all the sheriffs, ordering them to send to St. Albans at the beginning of August the reeve and four legal men from each township of the royal domains, that by their testimony and that of his own officers the amount of these losses might be determined. This would be to all England a familiar expedient, a simple use of the jury principle, with nothing new about it except the bringing of the local juries together in one place, nor must it be regarded as in any sense a beginning of representation. It has no historic connexion with the growth of that system, and cannot possibly indicate more than that the idea of uniting local juries in one place had occurred to some one. We have no evidence that this assembly was actually held, and it is highly probable that it was not. Nor can anything more be said with certainly of writs which were issued in November of this year directing the sheriffs to send four discreet men from each county to attend a meeting of the council at Oxford. John himself was busily occupied with a plan to transport the forces he had collected into Poitou to attack the king of France there, and he appointed the justiciar, Geoffrey Fitz Peter, and the Bishop of Winchester, Peter des Roches, as his representatives during his absence. These two held a great council at St. Albans in August at which formal proclamation was made of the restoration of good laws and the abolition of bad ones as the king had promised, the good laws now referred to being those of Henry I; and all sheriffs and other officers were strictly enjoined to abstain from violence and injustice for the future, but no decision was reached as to the sum to be paid the clergy.
|
