a wild
democracy, superior to the forms, too often disdains the essential
principles, of justice: the pride of despotism was envenomed by plebeian
envy, and the heroes of Athens might sometimes applaud the happiness of
the Persian, whose fate depended on the caprice of a _single_ tyrant.
Some salutary restraints, imposed by the people or their own passions,
were at once the cause and effect of the gravity and temperance of the
Romans. The right of accusation was confined to the magistrates. A vote
of the thirty five tribes could inflict a fine; but the cognizance of
all capital crimes was reserved by a fundamental law to the assembly of
the centuries, in which the weight of influence and property was sure to
preponderate. Repeated proclamations and adjournments were interposed,
to allow time for prejudice and resentment to subside: the whole
proceeding might be annulled by a seasonable omen, or the opposition
of a tribune; and such popular trials were commonly less formidable
to innocence than they were favorable to guilt. But this union of the
judicial and legislative powers left it doubtful whether the accused
party was pardoned or acquitted; and, in the defence of an illustrious
client, the orators of Rome and Athens address their arguments to the
policy and benevolence, as well as to the justice, of their sovereign.
2. The task of convening the citizens for the trial of each offender
became more difficult, as the citizens and the offenders continually
multiplied; and the ready expedient was adopted of delegating
the jurisdiction of the people to the ordinary magistrates, or to
extraordinary _inquisitors_. In the first ages these questions were rare
and occasional. In the beginning of the seventh century of Rome they
were made perpetual: four praetors were annually empowered to sit in
judgment on the state offences of treason, extortion, peculation, and
bribery; and Sylla added new praetors and new questions for those
crimes which more directly injure the safety of individuals. By these
_inquisitors_ the trial was prepared and directed; but they could only
pronounce the sentence of the majority of _judges_, who with some
truth, and more prejudice, have been compared to the English juries. To
discharge this important, though burdensome office, an annual list of
ancient and respectable citizens was formed by the praetor. After many
constitutional struggles, they were chosen in equal numbers from the
senate, the equestri