Scanned text contains errors.
6oO JUDEX, JUDICIUjVn
Judiccs every person who had been triburms plebis, quaestor, triumvir capital's, tribunus mili-tum in one of the first four legions, triumvir agris dandis assignandis, who was or had been in the senate, who was infamis, every person who was under thirty or above sixty years of age, every person who did not live in Rome or in the immediate neighbourhood, every father, brother, or son of a person who was or had been in the senate, and every person who was beyond seas. The Praetor who presided in this Quacstio, was to choose 450 judices, from whom the Judices for the particular case were to be taken by lot. (Fragmenta Legis Serviliae Repetundarum, &c. C. A. C. Klenze, Berlin, 1825, 4to.)
The attempts of the tribune M. Livius Dru-sus the younger had no result [leges liviae]. A Lex Plautia b. c. 89 enacted, that the Judices should be chosen by the tribes, five by each tribe, without any distinction of class. The Op-timates triumphed under L. Cornelius Sulla, who by a Lex Cornelia b. c. 80 enacted that the Judices should be taken exclusively from the Senators. But a Lex Aurelia (b. c. 70) enacted that the Judices should be chosen from the three classes — of Senators, Equites, and Tribuni Aerarii (Veil. ii. 32.) The Tribuni Aerarii were taken from the rest of the citizens, and were, or ought to have been, persons of some property. Thus the three decuriae of Judices were formed ; and it was either in consequence of the Lex Aurelia or some other lex that, instead of one urn for all the tablets, the decuriae had severally their balloting urn, so that the votes of the three classes were known. Dion Cassius (xxxviii. 8) ascribes this regulation to a Lex Fufia, and he says that the object was that the votes of the decuriae (efli'T?, ycvrj} might be known, though those of individuals could not, owing to the voting being secret. It is not known if the Lex Aurelia determined the number of Judices in any given case. A Lex Pompeia passed in the second consulate of Pompey (b. c. 55), seems to have made some modifications in the Lex Aurelia, as to the qualification of the Judices ; but the new provisions of this lex are only known from Asconius, who explains them in terms which are very far from being clear. The Lex Pompeia de Vi, and De Ambitu (b. c. 52) determined that eighty judices were to be selected by lot, out of whom the accuser and the accused might reject thirty. In the case of Clodius (b.c. 61), in the matter of the Bona Dea, there were fifty-six judices. It is conjectured that the number fixed for a given case, by the Lex Aurelia, was seventy judices.
A Lex Judiciaria of Julius Caesar (Sueton. Jul. 41 ; Cic. Philip, i. 8) took away the decuria of the Tribuni Aerarii, and thus reduced the judices to two classes (genera, the yzv-r} of Dion Cassius). A Lex Judiciaria, passed after his death by M. Antonius, restored the decuria of the Tribuni Aerarii, but required no pecuniary qualification from them: the only qualification which this lex required was, that a person should have been a centurion or have served in the legions. It appears that the previous Lex Pompeia, Lex Aurelia, and a Lex of Caesar, had given to those who had been centurions (qui ordines duxeranf) the privilege of being judices (judicatus), but still they required a pecuniary qualification (census}. The Lex of Antonius, besides taking away the pecuniary qualification, opened the judicia to the soldiers. (Cic.
Phil, i. 8, v. 5 ; Sueton. J. Caes. c. 41.) It seems probable that the expression ex centuriis, which ia used by Asconius in speaking of the change introduced by this Lex Pompeia, had reference to the admission of the centurions into the third class of judices.
Augustus, who altered the whole constitution of the body of judices by his leges judiciorum pub-licorum et privatorum, added to the existing three Decuriae Judicum, a fourth Decuria, called that of the Ducenarii, who had a lower pecuniary qualification, and only decided in smaller matters (de levioribus summis, Sueton. Aug. 32). Caligula (Sueton. Calig. J6) added a fifth Decuria, in order to diminish the labours of the judices. Augustus had already allowed each Decuria, in its turn, an exemption for one year, and had relieved them from sitting in the months of November and December. The whole number of judices was raised by Augustus to near 4000 (Plin. Hist. Nat. xxxiii. 7) ; and the judices in civil cases wera taken out of this body. They were chosen by the Praetors out of the persons who had the property qualification, and the duty of serving as a judex thus became one of the burdens to which citizens were liable.
As to the whole number of judices, included ut any given time in the Album Judicum, it seems almost impossible to state any thing with precision ; but it is obvious from what has been said, that the number must have varied with the various changes already mentioned. After the time of Augustus the number was about four thousand, and from this period, at least, there is no doubt that the Album Judicum contained the whole number of persons who were qualified to act as judices, both in Judicia Privata and Judicia Publica. The fourth Decuria of Augustus was limited in its functions to the Judicia Privata in which the matter in dispute was of small value. It is often stated by modern writers, without any qualification, that the various changes in the judiciary body from the time of the Lex Calpurnia to the end of the republic had reference both to the Judicia Publica and Privata ; though it is also stated that the objects of these various enactments were to elevate or depress one of the great parties in the state, by extending or limiting the body out of which the judices in any given case were to be chosen. But it is obvious that these reasons do not apply to the matter of Judicia Privata, in which a single judex generally acted, and which mostly concerned matters of property and contract. -Accordingly, a recent writer (Walter, GescMchte des Rom. Rechts, p. 716) has observed with more caution than some of his predecessors, that " there is no doubt that from the time of Augustus the Album Judicum had reference to the judices in civil matters, but that as to earlier times a difficulty arises from the fact that while the Lex Sempronia was in force, by which the senators were excluded from the Album Judicum, a Consularis is mentioned as a judex (Cic. de Off. iii. 19) ; and, on the other hand, an Eques is mentioned as a judex at a time when the Lex of Sulla was in force, and consequently senators only could be judices. (Cic. Pro Rose. Com. c. 14.)" These instances certainly are inconsistent with the fact of the Judicia Privata being regulated by the various Legis Judiciariae j but they are of small weight9 compared with the reasons derivable from the character of the two