University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
  
expand section 
  
expand section 
  

expand section1. 
expand section2. 
expand section3. 
expand section4. 
expand section5. 
expand section6. 
expand section7. 
expand section8. 
expand section9. 
expand section10. 
expand section11. 
expand section12. 
collapse section13. 
 13.1. 
 13.2. 
 13.3. 
expand section13.4. 
expand section13.5. 
 13.6. 
expand section13.7. 
 13.8. 
 13.9. 
 13.10. 
expand section13.11. 
collapse section13.12. 
  
  
 13.13. 
 13.14. 
expand section13.15. 
expand section13.16. 
expand section13.17. 
expand section13.18. 
expand section13.19. 
 13.20. 
expand section14. 
expand section15. 
expand section16. 
expand section17. 
expand section18. 
expand section19. 
expand section20. 
expand section21. 
expand section22. 
expand section23. 
expand section24. 
expand section25. 
expand section26. 
expand section27. 
expand section28. 
expand section29. 
expand section30. 
expand section31. 

6.6. 6. Of a single Magistrate.

A magistracy of this kind cannot take place but in a despotic government. We have an instance in the Roman history how far a single magistrate may abuse his power. Might it not be very well expected that Appius on his tribunal should contemn all laws, after having violated that of his own enacting? [19] Livy has given us the iniquitous distinction of the Decemvir. He had suborned a man to reclaim Virginia in his presence as his slave; Virginia's relatives insisted that by virtue of his own law she should be consigned to them, till the definitive judgment was passed. Upon which he declared that his law had been enacted only in favour of the father, and that as Virginius was absent, no application could be made of it to the present case. [20]

Footnotes

[19]

See Leg. 2, 24, Dig. ff. de orig. jur.

[20]

Quod pater puellæ abesset, locum injuriæ esse ratus. — Livy, dec. I, iii. 44.