Scanned text contains errors.
dcmumve actiwat. In the time of Augustus, the lex Cincia was confirmed by a senatusconsultum (Dion Cass. liv. 18), and a penalty of four times the sum received was imposed on the advocate. This fact of confirmation will explain a passage in Tacitus (Ann. xiii. 42). The law was so far modified in the time of Claudius, that an advocate was allowed to receive ten sestertia; if he took any sum beyond that, he was liable to be prosecuted for repetundae (repetundarum tcnebatur, Tacit. Aim. xi. 7; see also Sueton. Nero, 17, and the note in BurmamVs edition). [repetundae.] It appears that this permission was so far restricted in Trajan's time, that the fee could not be paid till the work was done. (Plin. Ep. v. 21).
So far the Cincian law presents no difficulty; but it appears that the provisions of the law were not limited to the case already stated. They applied also to gifts in general; or, at least, there were enactments which did limit the amount of what a person could give, and also required gifts to be accompanied with certain formalities; and it does not seem possible to refer these enactments to any other than the Cincian law. The numerous contradictions and difficulties which perplex this subject, are perhaps satisfactorily reconciled and removed by the following conjecture of Savigny (Ueber die Lex Oincia, Zeitschrift, &c. iv.) : — ." Gifts which exceeded a certain amount were only valid when made by mancipatio, in jure cessio, or by tradition : small gifts consequently were left to a person's free choice as before ; but large gifts (except in the case of near relations) were to be accompanied with certain formalities." The object of the law, according to Savigny, was to prevent foolish and hasty gifts to a large amount; and consequently was intended among other things to prevent fraud. This was effected by declaring that certain forms wpre necessary to make the gift valid, such as mancipatio and in jure cessio, both of which required some time and ceremony, and so allowed the giver opportunity to reflect on what he was doing. These forms also could not be observed, except in the presence of other persons, which was an additional security against fraud. It is true that this advantage was not secured by the law in the case of the most valuable things, nee mancipi^ namely, money, for the transferring of which bare tradition was sufficient ; but, on the other hand, a gift of a large sum of ready .money is one that people of all gifts are least likely to make.
Savigny concludes, and principally from a passage in Pliny's letters (x. 3), that the Cincian law originally contained no exception in favour of rela-'tives; but that all gifts above a certain amount required the formalities already mentioned. The emperor Antoninus Pius introduced an exception in favour of parents and children, and also of near collateral kinsmen. It appears that this exception was subsequently abolished (Cod. Hermog. vi. 1), but was restored by Constantine (a. n. 319) so far as it was in favour of parents and children ; and so it continued as long as the provisions of the Cincian law were in force.
As to the amount beyond which the law forbade a gift to be made, except in conformity to its provisions, see Savigny, Zeitsehrift, &c. iv. p. 36.
The matter of the lex Cincia is also discussed in an elaborate essay by Hasse (Rheinisches Museum, 1827), and it is discussed by Puchta, Inst. vol. ii. § 206. These examinations of the subject^ toge-
ther with the essay of Savigny, will furnish the reader with all the necessary references and materials for investigating this subject.
CLAIPDIA, a Lex passed in the time of the emperor Claudius, took away the agnatomm tutela in the case of women. (Gaius, i. 171.)
CLAUDIA de senatoribus, b. c. 218. The provisions of this Lex are stated by Livy (xxi. 63), and alluded to by Cicero (in Verr. v. 18) as antiquated and dead.
CLAUDIA de Socus, b. c. 177. (Liv.xli. 8,9.)
CLAUDIA de senatu cooptando hai.e-sinorum (Cic. in Verr. ii. 49).
CLODI AE, the name of various plebiscita, proposed by Clodius when tribune, b. c. 58.
clodia de auspiciis, prevented the magis-tratus from dissolving the Comitia Tributa, by declaring that the auspices were unfavourable. This lex therefore repealed the Aelia and Fufia. It also enacted that a lex might be passed on the Dies Fasti. (Dion Cass. xxxviii. 13 ; Cic, in Vatin. 17, in Pison. 4, 5.) [aelia lex.]
clodia de censoribus. [caecilia.]
clodia de civibus romanis interemptis, to the effect that " qui civem Romanum indemna-tum interemisset ei aqua et igni interdiceretur." (Veil. Pat. ii. 45.) It was in consequence of this lex that the interdict was pronounced against Cicero, who considers the whole proceeding as a privilegium. (Pro Domo^ 18, &c., Post Redit. in Sen. 2. 5, &c. ; Dion Cass. xxxviii. 14.)
clodia de sodalitatibus or de collegiis restored the Sodalitia which had been abolished by a senatusconsultum of the year B. c. 80, and permitted the formation of new sodalitia. (Cic. in Pis. 4, pro Seat. 25, ad Ait. iii. 15 ; Dion Cass, xxxviii. 13.)
clodia de libertinorum supfragiis (Cic. pro Mil. 12, 33).
clodia de rege ptolemaeo et de exsu-libus byzantinis (Veil. Pat. ii. 45 ; Cic. pro Dom. 8, 20, pro Sest. 26 ; Dion Cass. xxxviii. 30 ; Plut. Cat. Min. 34).
There were other so-called Leges Clodiae, which were however Privilegia.
COMMISSORIA LEX. [commissoria lex.]
CORNELIAE. Various leges passed in the dictatorship of Sulla and by his influence, are so called. (Liv. Epit. 89.)
agraria, by which many of the inhabitants of Etruria and Latium were deprived of the complete civitas and retained only the commercium, and a large part of their lands were made Publicum and given to military colonists. (Cic. in Hull. ii. 28, iii. 2, 3.)
de civitate (Liv. Epit. 86; Cic. pro Dom. 30, pro Caecin. 33, 35 ; Sail. Hist. Frag. lib. 1. Orat. Lepidi.)
de falsis. [falsum.]
de injuriis. [injuria.]
judiciaria. [judex, p. 650, a.]
de magistratibus (Appian, Bell. Civ. i. 100, 101), partly a renewal of old Plebiscita (Liv. vii. 42, x. 13).