Page 157
TVlly mētioneth a law tearmed lex accusatoria, which in truth was no lawe,* 1.1 neither was there any author thereof: but there was a such a received custome a∣mongst the Romans, that the accuser should obiect against the party accused, not onely the present crime then questi∣oned, but all other scapes and faults cōmitted long before to the bettering of his matter: that at length this accusato∣ry custome became in manner of a law, and so was called Lex accusatoria. vid. Franc. Syluium in orat. pro Mur.r 1.2 Their custome also was to procure others to ioine with them in their accusations; thoses 1.3 Tully calleth Subscriptores, be∣cause they did subscribe vnto the accusation.
Whereas Sempronius had preferred a law,* 1.4 whereby he tooke away the autority of sitting in iudgement from the Senatours, and appropriated, it to the Romane Gentlemen; Q. Servilius Caepio being Consul did afterwarde preferre a∣nother law, whereby the administration of iudgement was divided betweene the Senatours and the Gentlemen.
Rupilia lex vetabat diebus triginta sortiri dicam.]* 1.5 Here we must note witht 1.6 Sigonius, that this law was of force on∣lie in the province of Sicilia: also that it is one thing scribe∣re dicam .i. to enter an actiō, another sortiri dicam .i. by lots to choose the Iudges, which was 30. daies after.
Though by vertue of Servilius his law the Senators were made capeable of the office of a Iudge,* 1.7 yet they were not thereby equally capeable with the Romane Gentlemen: & therefore did M. Livius Drusus ordeine, that the Iudges should be elected equally out of both orders, namely three