ANCE15J> v>> -^IIIBRARYQ^ 5j^tllNIVERJ/A ^^AaVH8!H^ '^^A8V«an-l'^ '^il?13DNVS01^ vvlOSANCElfj>. a "^/saMiNnawv ^lOSANCElfJV. > I ■^/.?a3A!Nn-3WV^ \^im\m//. 5,OFCAIIFO/?^ ^OFCALIFOff^ ^^Aavaan#^ .^v\E•| < >- v-"?? -^UIBRARYQr^ ^5NlllBRARY<3^ \oi\mi^^ %Qi{W)'^^^ AWEUNIVER% o o ^AJI3AINJ1-3WV I ^0FCAIIF0% x,OFCAllF0% 6^ ^ \rtE•UNIVtk:,/^, o vvlOSANCEl% o '^/^a3AiNn-3U'^^ ^ ■?^ ^ ''UNIVER5'/A .v:lOSANCElfj> -s^^lLIBRARY^/^ § 1 ir^ ^ ^;^l•llBRARY^^ &Aavaaiii^ 5' ^>SlllBRARY/?/^ ^IIIBRARYQ^^ ^^WE•lNIVEW^/J^^ ^IMCElfj;^ o ^ t'^ y/7,lHVJJ8IH^ aWEUNIVERJ'/, .«^.lOSANCElfj> %83AIN(13WV ^^0FCAIIF0%, ^OFCAIIFO/?^. % .^lOSANCEUj'^ o ^ %a3AiNn-3ttV 55^. ^lOSANCElfjb. ^^l•llBRARYQr ^lUBRARYQ^ AMEUNIVERVa ^J'ilJONVSOl^ aweuniver% <: '^ "^/jaMiNa-ay^^ "^(JAUvaaii^ '^(?Aavaan# %'ii33Nvso# "^aaAiNn-JV^^ oo ^^lOS■ANGElfJ•^ ^a^AINrt-iWV^ o .. .^stllBRARYOr^ 5MEUNIVERS//, ^lOSANCElfj^ O ^ILIBRARY-O^ ^ILIBRARYOr "^ ^&AavaaiB -Tl {^ -s^^lUBRARYQ^ -^lUBRARYQ^ %dnvDjo^ '^ojnvDjo^ ^^WEUNIVER% "^j:?13dnvsoi^ ^^lOSANCEl^; Or O %a3AINn-3WV^ ^lOSANCElf/^ ■^/^asAiNnswv^ 5AcOFCAllF0% ^ ^OFCAIIFOM)^ ^^^Aavaani^ "^(^Aavaanii^ ^MEUNIVER% "^j:?i30nvsoi^ v^lOS-ANCElfj^ ft; o %a3AINn3WV' ^^^ILlBRARYOc ^7 «• < ' " ■^ .\WEUNIVER% vvlOSANCElfj> ^ sAUIBRARYOt, A^lLIBRARYQc CA^^ JOHNS HOPKINS DNIVERSITY STUDIES IN Historical and Political Science HERBERT B. ADAMS, Editor History is past Politics and Politics present History — Freeman NINTH *SERIES VII-VIII PUBLIC LANDS AND AGRARIAN LAWS OF THE * ROMAN REPUBLIC BY ANDREW STEPHENSON, Ph.D. I'ro/eisor of Uhloiij, Wesletjan Unioertity baltimore The Johns Hopkins Pkess july- august, 1891 3'n»:'-' Copyright, 1891, by The Johns Hopkins Press. JOHN MCBPHY & CO., PRINTERS. BALTIMORE. PREFACE lu the followiug pages it lias been my object to trace the history of the domain lands of Home from the earliest times to the estab- lishment of the Empire. The plan of the work has been to sketch the origin and growth of the idea of private property in land, the expansion of the ager j^uhlicus by the conquest of neighboring territories, and its absorption by means of sale, by gift to the peo- ple, and by the establishment of colonies, until wholly merged in private property. This necessarily involves a history of the agra- rian la\vs, as land distributions were made and colonies established only in accordance with laws previously enacted. My reason for undertaking such a work as the present is found in the fact that agrarian movements have borne more or less upon every point in Roman constitutional history, and a proper knowl- edge of the former is necessary to a just interpretation of the latter. This whole question presents numerous obscurities before which it has been necessary more than once to hesitate ; it offers, both in its entirety and in detail, difficulties which I have at least earn- estly endeavored to lessen. These obscurities and difficulties, arising in part from insufficiency of historical evidence and in part from the conflicting statements of the old historians, have been recognized by all writers and call forth on my part no claim for indulgence. This monograph is intended as a chapter merely of a history of the public lands and agrarian laws of Rome, written for the pur- pose of a future comparison with the more recent agrarian move- ments in England and America. Andrew Stephenson. MiDDLETOWN, CONN. May 8, 1891. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page. CHAPTER T. Sec. 1. Landed Property 7 " 2. QuiRiTARiAN Ownership 13 " 3. Ager Publicus 15 " 4. RoMAK Colonies 19 CHAPTER II. Sec. 5. Lex Cassia 24 " 6. Agrarian Movements between 486 and 367 26 (a). Extension of Territory of conquest up to the year 367 B. c 35 (6). Colonies Founded between 454 and 367 36 Sec. 7. Lex Licinia 36 " 8. Agrarian Movements between 367 and 133 46 (a). Extension of Territory by conquest between 367 and 133 59 (6). Colonies Founded between 367 and 133 60 Latipundia 62 Influence of Slavery 66 Lex Sempronia Tiberiana 69 Lex Sempronia Gaiana 77 CHAPTER HI. Lex Thoria 79 Agrarian Movements between 111 and 86 88 Effect of the Sullan Revolution 91 Agrarian Movements between 86 and 59 93 Lex Julia Agraria 95 Distributions of Land after the Civil War between CiESAR AND POMPEY 98 19. Distributions from the Death of C^sar to the time OF Augustus 99 (a). Lex Agraria of Lucius Antonius 99 (6). Lex de Colonis in Agros Deducendis 99 (c). Second Triumvirate 100 5 Sec 9. (( 10. (( 11. « 12. Sec 13. (( 14. C( 15. « 16. « 17. « 18. ^ r PUBLIC LANDS AND AGRARIAN LAWS OF THE ROMAN REPUBLIC. CHAPTER I. Sec. 1. — Landed Property. The Roinaus were a people that originally gave their almost exclusiv'e attention to agriculture and stock-raising. The sur- names of the most illustrious families, as Piso (miller), Porcius (swine-raiser), Lactucinius (lettuce-raiser), Stolo (a shoot), etc., prove this. To say that a man was a good farmer was, at one time, to bestow upon him the highest praise.^ This char- acter, joined to the spirit of order and private avarice which in a marked degree distinguished the Romans, has con- tributed to the development among them of a civil law which is perhaps the most remarkable monument which antiquity has left us. This civil code has become the basis of the law of European peoples, and recommends the civiliza- tion of Rome to the veneration of mankind. Tiie corner-stone of this legislation was the constitution of the law of property.^ This property applies itself to every- ^ Cato, De Re Rusdca, I, lines 3-8. " Majores nostri .... virimi bonum cum laudabant, ita laudabant, bonum agricolam bonumque colonum. Am- plissime laudari existimabatur, qui ita laudabatur." ' Muirhead, Roman Law, 36 et seq. 7 8 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [328 thing in the law of Rome, to land, to persons and to obli- gations. Urbs, the name of the village, takes its origin, according to an etymology given by Varro,^ from the furrow which the plow traced about the habitations of the earliest dwellers. But what is of more interest to us is that the legal significa- tion of Urbs and Roma was different. The former was the village comprised within the sacred enclosure ; the latter was the total agglomeration of habitations which composed the village, properly ^ so called, and the outskirts, or suburbs. The powers of certain magistrates ceased with the sacred limits of the Ui'bs, while the privileges accorded to a citizen of Rome extended to the village and the suburbs and finally embraced the entire Roman world. The most ancient documents which have reached us from the history of India and Egypt reveal that they had landed property fully established, while Roman annals reveal to us the very creation of this institution. Whatever modern crit- icism may deduce, Dionysius, Plutarch, Livy, and Cicero agree in representing the first king of Rome as merely establishing public property in Roman soil. This national property, the people possessed in -common and not individually. Such appears to us to be the quiritarian property par excellence j"^ and its primitive form was a variety of public community* of which individual property was but a later solemn emancipa- tion. To this historic theory attaches the true notion of quiritarian land of which we will speak in greater detail hereafter. As regards the organization and constitution of individual and private property, the traditions themselves attribute this to the second king of Rome, the real founder of Roman ^ Varro, De Ldngua Latina, V, 143. 2 Frag, to Digest, 287 and 147 of Title 16, Bk. 50 witli notes of Schultung and Small. ' Plutarch's Romulus, ^ 19. * Mommsen, History of Rome, I, 194. 329] Landed Propei^ty. 9 society, who divided the territory among the citizens, mark- ing off the limits of individual shares and placing them under the protection of religion. In this way a religious charter was granted to the institutions of private property. Thus a primitive division of territory appears to have been the basis of these varied traditions, but the precise form of this division eludes us. The Roman territory was confined for many ages to a sur- face of very limited extent, which properly bore the name of Ager Romanus. This name with signification slightly changed appeared to be still in use in the time of the empire, and even at the present day a portion of the Roman territory which very nearly corresponds to the ancient territory of the imperial period is called Agro Romano} That which was properly called Ager Romanics at first only occupied the surface of a slightly expanded arc whose chord was the river Tiber.^ Primi- tive Rome did not extend beyond the Tiber into Etruria, and toward Latium her possessions did not extend beyond the limits of some five or six miles reckoning from the Palatine. Toward the east the towns of Antemnae, Fidenae, Caenina, Collatia and Gabia lay in the immediate neighborhood, thus limiting the extension of the city in that direction within a radius of five or six miles ;^ and northward the Anio* formed the limit. To the southwest as you approach Lavinium, the sixth milestone marked the boundary of Rome. Thus with the possible exception of a small strip of land extending upon either bank of the Tiber to its mouth, and embracing the old site^ of Ostia, have we marked out all of ancient Rome. Strabo ^ says it could be gone round in a single day. And according to this same author it was within these limits that the annual auspices ^ could be taken. ' Sismondi, Etudes sur I'econ. polit., I, 2, O- " Pseudo Fabius Pictor, Bk. I, p. 54; Pint., Numa, 16; Festus V° Pectus- tum Palati, p. 198 and 566, Lindemann. ^Arnold, Roman History, I, ch. 3, par. 4. *Moramsen, I, 75. 5 Strabo, Bk. 5, 253. ^ Strabo, Bk. 5, ch. 3, § 2. ' Arnold, I, ch. 3. 2 10 Public Lands of the Roman Republic^ [330 Both city and land increased with time. Property seemed to have been added and lost successively during the reign of the kings.^ The last increase of the Agei' Romanus was due to the labors of Servius Tullius, and it was in the reign of this king that it reached its greatest limit. Dionysius^ says : " As soon as he (Servius) was invested with the government, he divided the public lands among such of the Romans as having no lands of their own, cultivated those of others. . . . He added two hills to the city, that called the Viminal and the Esquiline hill, each of which forms a considerable city ; these he divided among such Romans as had no houses, to the intent that they might build them. . . . This king was the last who enlarged the circumference of the city by the addition of these two hills to the other five, having first consulted the auspices as the law decided, and performed the other religious rites. Further than this the city has not since then been extended." Without doubt these possessions received great additions in later times,^ but they were not incorporated in the Ager Romanus as the preceding had been. The subju- gated territories kept their, ancient names while their lands were made the object of distributions to the people, of public sales to the citizens who also extended their possessions outside of Roman* territory, or else the new conquests were abandoned to municipia, given up to colonies, or became a part of that which was called Ager Publious. In fine, it was a funda- mental principle of the public law of Rome that the lands and the persons of the people conquered belonged to the con- queror, the Roman people, who either in person or by their delegates disposed of them as it seemed best. Among the ancients war always decided concerning both liberty and property. > Dionysius, II, 55; V, 33, 36; III, 49-50; Livy, I, 23-36. * Dionysius, IV, 13. ' Varro, De Lingua Latina, V, 33. * Sigonius, De Antiq. Juris Civ. Bom., Bk. I, ch. 2, 331] . Landed Property. 11 The result of all these facts was that the Roman territory was made the object of a division or a primitive distribution either among the three races of the first population, or a little later among the citizens or inhabitants. This very same principle has been frequently observed in recent times in regard to confiscated ^ territories and conquered j)eoples. Now what was the allotment of the first distribution of land ? Upon this topic the ancient authorities are blind and confusing to such an extent as to be wholly inadequate for the solution of the difficulty. Among the more recent authorities, two opposing systems have been sustained, the one represented by Montesquieu, and the other by Nie- buhr. (1) According to Montesquieu, the kings of Rome divided the land into perfectly equal lots for all the citi- zens and the title of the law of the Twelve Tables rela- tive to successions was for no other object than to establish this ancient equality of the division of lands.^ (2) Nie- buhr,^ on the contrary, claimed that territorial property was primitively the attribute of the patriciate and everyone who was not a member of this noble race was incapable of possessing any part of the territory. From this theory the author deduced numerous consequences which are important both to law and history. Neither of these systems is free from errors. Montesquieu seems to have made no difference between patrician and plebeian in using the term citizen, while it is no longer disputed that the plebeian was not a burgess and consequently had no civic rights save those granted to him by the ruling class. His idea of goods must have, at least, become chimerical at a very early date, as this equality was so little suspected by the ancients that Plutarch,* after ' Hume's Hist, of Eng., I, ch. 4 : IV, ch. 61. ' Esprit des lois, Liv. 27, c. I. ^ Roman Hist, II, 164 ; III, 175 and 211. * Lycurgus and Numa, II ; Cicero, De Repub., II, 9. 12 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [332 having spoken of the efforts of Lycurgus to overturn the inequality of wealth among the Spartans, accuses Numa of having neglected a necessity so important. It is moreover difficult to see how Montesquieu could think that testa- mentary disposition tended to maintain equality when the privilege was accorded to every citizen of disposing of his entire patrimony by will even to the prejudice of his chil- dren.^ Again, the law of debts was hardly favorable^ to equality. Niebuhr clearly ^ denied the existence of the plebs until Ancus incorporated the Latins and bestowed upon them peculiar privileges thus forming a new and third class dis- tinct from both patricians and clients. Had Niebuhr succeeded in establishing this view, the right to landed property would appear to be wholly vested in the patricians, for a client, from the very nature of his position, could hold nothing independent of his master. But this theory has fallen to the ground and no writer of the present day pretends to uphold it. The plebeians existed from the very first and some of them held land in full private ownership very little different from the quiritarian ownership of the patricians. Cicero, who in his Republic has occupied himself with the ancient constitution of Rome and has spoken in detail of the division of the lands, always speaks of the distribution among the citizens without regard to quality of patrician or plebeian, divisit viritim civibus. He has nowhere written that territorial riches were the exclusive appanage of the patriciate. It must be confessed, however, that it is doubtful whether he intended to embrace the plebeians in his civibus. For more than two centuries before the time of Cicero the plebeians had enjoyed the full rights of Roman citizenship, but for more than that length of time property ' Muirhead, Roman Laiv, 46 and note — " uti legasset suae rei ita jus esto." * Muirhead, 92-96. ^ Niebuhr, I. * Momm., 1, 126 ; Ihne, I ; Nitzsch, Oeschichte der romischen RepvAlik, 52 ; Lange, RiJmische Geschickle, I, 18, 333] Quiritarian Ownership. 13 had been concentrated in the hands of the aristocracy. This result was the consequence of the Roman constitution ^ and the establishment of a populous city in the midst of a narrow surrounding country. Roman policy had never been con- ducive to this concentration, and it will hereafter appear that the nobility who had the chief direction and administration of public affairs had little by little usurped the property which formed the domain of the state, i. e. Ager Publicus, and swal- lowed up the revenues due the treasury. Sec. 2. — Quiritarian Ownership. Citizenship was the first requisite to the right of property in Roman territory. This rule, although invariable and inherent in the Roman state, bent under the influence of international politics or the philosophy of law, yet its severity affords us a notable characteristic of the law of ancient Rome. Cicero and Gains have preserved to us an important monu- ment of this law in a frae^raent of the Twelve Tables which proclaims the solemn principle, adversus hostem aeterna aucto- ritas esto} Hostis in the old Latin language was synonymous with stranger, petngrinus} This Roman name was moreover applied to a pei'^on who had forfeited the protection of the law by reason of a criminal condemnation, and who was therefore designated peregrinus.* Audoritas also had in old Latin a different signification from what it has in later Latin. It expressed the idea of the right to claim and defend in equity. It was very nearly equivalent to the right of property.^ The sense of the Roman ' Dureau de la Malle, Mem. sur les pop. de I'ltcUie, 500 et seq. *De Officiis, I, 12; Gaius, Frag., 234: Digest, 50, 16. ^Varro, De L. L. V. 14; Plautus, Trinuvimus, Act I, Scene 2, V. 75; Harper's Latiii Dictionary; Cicero, De Off., I, 12: "Hostis enim apud majores nostros is dicibatur, quern nunc peregrinum dicimus." *Cic., loc. ciL; Gaius, Frag., 234. *Forcellini, Lexic; Harper's Latin Lex. 14 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [3&4 law was, then, that the peregrinus could not bar or proceed against a Roman, a disposition somewhat similar to the old law of England.^ And as it was necessary to be a citizen in order to acquire by the civil and solemn means which domi- nated the law of property in Rome, it followed that the pere- grini were excluded from all right to property in land by these laws. This exclusive legislation for a long time gov- erned Europe and did not disappear even from the Code Napoleon of 1819." We have a forcible example of the severity of the old Roman law in this regard in the text of Gaius, — Aut enim ex jure quiritium unusquisque dominus erat, aid non intelligebatur dominus.^ Dominium was therefore inseparable from Jus Quiritium, the law of the Roman city, the optimum jus civium Romano- rum. The peregi'inus was excluded from landed property both Roman and private ; he could neither inherit nor trans- mit ; claim nor defend in equity. Moreover the name pei'e- grinus was not confined to the stranger proper but was also bestowed upon subjects of Rome* who, being deprived of their property and also of political liberty by right of con- quest, had not received the right of citizenship which was for a long time confined within very narrow limits. It would thus appear conclusive from the law quoted that the client and ple- beian could not at first hold land optimo ex jure quiritium. Thus the tenure of the patricians was three-fold : first, they had full property in the land ; second, they had a seigniorial right, jus in re, in the land of their clients and the plebeians whose property belonged to the populus, i. e. the generality of the patricians ; in the third place, in their own hands, they ' i. e. The descendents of a person escheated could bring no action for the recovery of the property. ^ Giraud, Mecherches aur le Droit de Propriete, p. 210. 3 Gaius, Bk. II, 40. *Ulpian, Frag., Title XIX, 4; Giraud, 216. 335] Ager Publicus. 16 held lands which were portions of the domain and which were held by a very precarious tenure called possessio. According to Ihne, all lands in Rome were held by the above mentioned tenure until the enactment of tiie Icilian law de Aventino puhlicando which involved a change of tenure by converting the former dependent and incumbered tenure of the plebeians into full property. Sec. 3. — Ager Publicus. In her early history Rome was continually making fresh conquests, and in this way adding to her territory.^ She steadfastly pursued a course of destruction to her neighbors in order that she might thereby grow rich and powerful. In this way large tracts of territory became Roman land, the property of the state or Ager Publicus? This public land extended in proportion to the success of the Roman arms, since the confiscation of the territory of the vanquished was, in the absence of more favorable terms, a part of the law of war. All conquered lands before being granted or sold to private individuals were Ager Publicus,^ a term which with few exceptions came to embrace the whole Roman world. This Ager Publicus was farther increased by towns * volun- tarily surrendering themselves to Rome without aw^aiting the iron hand of war. These were commonly mulcted of one- third of their land.^ "The soil of the country is not the product of labor any more than is water or air. Individual citizens caimot therefore lay any claim to lawful property in land as to anything ^ produced by their own hands." The state in this case, as the representative of the rights and * Long, Decline of the Roman Rep., I, ch. 11. ' Muirhead, Roman Law, 92. * Ortolan, Histoire de la legislation Romaine, p. 21. * Mommsen, I, 131 ; Arnold, I, 157. "Dionysius, IV, 11, Livy. «Ihne, I, 175. 16 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [336 interests of society, decides how the land shall be divided among the members of the community, and the rules laid down by the state to regulate this matter are of the first and highest importance in determining the civil condition of the country and the prosperity of the people. Whenever but one class among the people is privileged to have property in land a most exclusive oligarchy is formed.^ When the land is held in small portions by a great number and nobody is legally or practically excluded from acquiring land, there we find provided the elements of democracy. According to the strictest right of conquest in antiquity the defeated lost not only their personal freedom, their moveable and landed " property, but even life itself All was at the mercy of the conquerors. In practice a modification of this right took place and in Rome extreme severity was applied only in extreme cases, generally as a punishment for treason.^ This magnanimity was not rare and it even went so far as to restore the whole of the territory to the people subdued.* But let us not suppose that this humanity toward a conquered people sprang from any pity inspired by their forlorn con- dition. It was due merely to the interest of the conquerors themselves. The conquered lands must still be cultivated and the depleted population restored. For this reason the con- quered had generally not only life and freedom left them but also the means of livelihood, i. e. some portion of their land. This portion they held subject to no restrictions or services save those levied upon quiritarian ])roperty. It was private property to the full legal extent of the expression, thus being in the unlimited disposition of the individual,^ These people formed the nucleus of the plebeians, the freemen who were 1 Ihne, r, 175. * Livy, Bk. I, c. 38, with note by Drachenborch ; Livy, Bk. VII, c. 31. ^ Siculus Flaccus, De Conditione Agrorwn, 2, 3 : " Ut vero Romani omnium gentium potiti sunt, agros alios ex hoste captos in viclorem poi)ulum partiti sunt, alios verro agros vendiderunt, ut Sabinorum ager qui dicitur quaes- torius." * Cicero, in Verrem, II, Bk. 3, § 6. * Giraud, Droit de propriele chez les romains, 160. 337] Ager Publicus. 17 members of the Roman state ' without actually having any political rights. The Ager Publicus was the property of the state and as such could be alienated only by the state.^ This alienation could be accomplished in two ways : (a). By public sale ; (6). By gratuftous distribution. (a). The public sale was merely an auction to the highest bidder and in the later days of the monarchy and early part of the republic, rich plebeians must have become possessed of large tracts of land in this way ; the privilege of acquiring property in land having been extended to them some time before the Servian reform.^ (6). The gratuitous distribution of land was accomplished by means of Agrarian Laws or royal grant and had for its object the establishment of colonies for purposes of defence, the rewarding of veterans or meritorious soldiers/ or in later times, the providing for impoverished plebeians. But even in the earliest times a portion of the domain lands was excluded from sale or private appropriation,^ in order to serve as a resource for the needs of the state. This was the general usage of ancient republics and this maxim of reserved lands was recommended ^ by Aristotle as the first principle of political economy. Such reserved ager publicus was leased either in periods of five years (quinquennial leaseholds) or perpetually, i. e., by emphyteutic lease or copyhold. From these lands ^ the treasury received an income of from one-tenth to one-fifth of the annual crops. Besides these legal methods mentioned there was another very common one which was seemingly never established by any law and therefore existed merely by title of tolerance. I 1 Ihne, I, 175. « Muirhead, 92; Giraud, 165. 'Higin., De Limit. Const, apud Goes. Rei Agr. Script., pp. 159-160. * Giraud, 164. ^ Dionysius, II, 7. Aristotle, Polit., Z. Ke Polybius, II, 21. " Livy, Epit., XX, 19. ^" De agris milituin ejus decretum, ut quod quisque eorum annos in His- pania aut in Africa niilitasset, in singulos annos bina jugera acciperet, earn agrum decemviri assignarent." Livy, XXXI, 49. 50 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [370 more accessible and that the price of everything, especially of the necessaries of life, had increased. In consequence of this it was difficult for soldiers to support themselves with their pay. The presents of a few sesterces given them as prize money in no way made sufficient recompense for all the miseries and privations which they had passed through dur- ing their long absence. Grants of land were the only means of recompensing their military services. This is the first example that we have found of soldiers being thus rewarded, and it consequently initiated a custom which became most frequent especially in the time of the empire. Upon the conquest of Italy which followed the expedition of Pyr- rhus, the Romans found themselves led into a long series of foreign wars ; Sicily furnished the stepping-stone to Africa ; Africa to Spain ; all these countries becoming Roman provinces. As soon as the second Punic war closed, Hannibal formed an alliance with the king of Macedonia. A war-cloud rose^ in the east. The ^tolians asked aid from Rome, and statesmen could foretell that it would be impossible for Roman armies not to interfere between Greece and Macedonia. But these countries had been from ancient times most intimately connected with the orient, i. e., Asia, where the Seleucidae still ruled, so that a war with Greece, which was inevitable, could not fail to bring on a war with the successors of Alexander, and, these hostilities once engaged in, who could say where these acci- dents of war would cease, or when Roman arms could be laid aside? In this critical condition it was prudent to attach the soldiers to the republic by bonds and interests the most inti- mate, to make them j)roprietors and to assure subsistence to their families during; their long absence. These wars did not much resemble those of the early republic which had for a theatre of war the country in the immediate vicinity of Rome. ' Momm., II, 230-241. 371] Agrarian 3Iovements between 367 and 133. 51 The senate continued to take the initiative in agrarian movements. In 172, after the close of the wars against the liigiirians and Gauls, we again see the senate spontaneously decreeing a new division of the lands. A part of the territory of Liguria and Cisalpine Gaul was confiscated and a senatus consultum ordered a distribution of this land to the commons. The praetor of the city A. Atilius, was authorized to ap])oint decemvirs, whose names Livy gives, to assign ten jugera to Roman citizens and three jugera to Latin ^ allies. Thus the senate, with a newly-born sagacity, rendered useless the demands of the tribune and recognized the justice and the utility of the agrarian laws against which it had so long protested. Indeed, it justified the propositions of the first author of an agrarian law by admitting to a share in the conquered lands the I^atin allies who had so often contributed to their growth. This is the last agrarian law which Livy mentions. The Persian war broke out in this year, and an account of it fills the remainino; books of this author which have come down to us. However, ])rior to the proposition of Tiberius Gracchus, we find in Varro"' the mention of a new assignment of land of seven jugera viritim, made by a tribune named Licinius in the year 144 ; but the author has given such a meagre mention of it that we are unable to determine where these lands were located. If we join to these facts the cession of public territories to the creditors of the state, in 200, we shall have mentioned all agrarian laws and distributions of territory which took place before the lex Se^n- 2:)ronia Tibei-iana in 133. Condition of the Country at the time of the Gracchan Roga- tions. During the period between 367 and 133 we find no 'Livy, XLII, 4: " Eodem anno, qiumi agri Ligustini et Gallici, quod bello captum erat, aliquantum vacaret, senatus-consultum factum ut is ager viritim ex senatus consulto creavit A. Atilius praetor urbanus. . . . Diverserunt dena jugera in singulos. sociis nominis Latini terna. « Ihne, IV, 370." 52 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [372 record of serious disputes between the patricians and commons. Indeed, the senate usually took the lead in popular measures ; lands were assigned without any demand on the part of the plebeians. We must not be deceived by this seeming har- mony. In the midst of this apparent calm a radical change was taking place in Roman society. It is necessary for us to understand this new condition of affairs in the republic before it will be possible to comprehend the rogations of the Gracchi. One of the greatest dangers to the republic at this time reveals itself hi the claims^ of the Italians. These people had poured out their blood for Rome ; they had contributed more than the Romans themselves to the accomplishing of those rapid conquests which, after the subjugation of Italy, quickly extended the power of Rome. In what way had they been rewarded? After the terrible devastations which afflicted Italy in the Hannibalic war had ceased, the Italian allies found themselves ruined. Whilst Latium, which con- tained the principal part of the old tribes of citizens, had suffered comparatively little, a large portion of Samnium, Apulia, Campania, and more particularly of Lucania and Bruttium, was almost depopulated ; and the Romans in pun- ishing the unfaithful "allies" had acted with ruthless cruelty.^ When at length peace was concluded, large districts were uncultivated and uninhabited. This territory, being either confiscated from the allies for taking part M-ith Hannibal, or deserted by the colonists, swelled the ager publicus of Rome, and was either given to veterans^ or occupied by Roman capi- talists, thus increasing the revenues of a few nobles. If a nation is in a liealthful condition politically and economically so that the restorative vigor of nature is not impeded by bad restrictive laws, the devastations of land and losses of human life are quickly repaired. We might the ' Livy, XXXI, 4, 1 ; Ihne, IV, 370-372. ^Livy, loc. cii. 373] Agrarian Movemmts beticeen 367 and 133. 53 more especially have expected this in a climate so genial and on a soil so fertile as that of Italy. But Roman laws so restricted the right of buying and selling land that in every Italian community none but members of that community, or Roman citizens, could * buy or inherit. This restriction upon free competition, by giving the advantage to Roman citizens, was in itself sufficient to ruin the prosperity of every Italian town. This law operated continually and unobservedly and resulted in placing,-^ year by year, a still larger quantity of the soil of Italy in the hands of the Roman aristocracy. In order to palliate the evils of conquest or at least to hide their conditions of servitude, the Romans had accorded to a part of the Italians the title of allies, and to others the privi- leges of municipia} These privileges were combined in a very skillful manner in the interest of Rome, but this skill did not hinder the people from perceiving that they depended upon the mere wish of the conquerors and consequently were not rights, but merely favors to be revoked at will. The Latini, who had been the first people conquered by Rome and who had almost always remained faithful, enjoyed under the name of jus Latii considerable privileges. They held in great ^ part the civil and political rights of Roman citizens. They were able by special services individually to become Roman citizens and thus to obtain the full jus Romanum. There were other peoples who, although strangers to Latium, had been admitted, by reason of their services* to Rome, to participate in the benefits of the jus Latii. The other peoples, admitted merely to the jus Italicum, did not enjoy any of the civ^il or political rights of Roman citizens, nor any of the privileges of I^atin " allies ; at best they kept some souvenirs 1 Ihne, IV, 148. *Ihne, IV, 371. »Ihne, IV, 354; Momm., Ill, 277. *Moium., I, 151-162; Iline, IV, 179. Marquardt u. Momm., IV, 26- 27, 63. 5 Livy, IX, 43, 23 ; Ihne, IV, ISl. « Ihne, IV, 185-186. Marquardt u. Momm., 46, 60. 54 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [374 of their departed independeuce in tlieir interior administra- tion, but otherwise were considered as subjects of Rome. And yet it was for the aggrandizement of this city that they shed their blood upon all the fields of battle which it pleased Rome to choose ; it was for the glory and extension of the Roman power that they gained these conquests in which they had no share. Some who had attempted to regain their inde- pendence were not even accorded the humble privileges of the other people of Italy, but were reduced to the state of pre- fectures. These were treated as provinces and governed by prefects or proconsuls sent ^ out from Rome. Such were . Capua, Bruttium, Lucania, the greater part of Samnium, and .^^^^...Cisalpine Gaul, which country, indeed, was not even con- sidered as a part of Italy. Those who had submitted without resistance to the domination of the Romans, and had rendered some services to them, had bestowed upon them the title of municipia.^ These municipia governed themselves and were divided into two classes : (1 ,) Municipia sine suffragio, for example, Caere and Etruria, had only interior privileges ; their inhabitants could not vote at Rome and, consequently, could not ^ participate in the exer- cise of sovereignty. (2.) Municipia cum suffragio had, outside of their political and civil rights, the important right of voting'' at Rome. These citizens of villages had then, as Cicero said of the citizens of Arpinum, two countries, one ex natura, the other ex jure. Lastly, there were some cities in the south of Italy, i. e. in Magna Graecia, that had received ^ the name of federated cities. They did not appear to be subject to Rome ; their contingents of men and money were looked upon as volun- tary^ gifts ; but, in reality, they were under the domination of Rome, and had, at Rome, defenders or patrons chosen because 1 Marquardt u. Momm., IV, 41-43. ^ Ibid, IV, 26. •' Marquardt u. Momm., IV, 27-34. * Ibid. * Manjuardt u. Momm., IV, 44. * Marquardt u. Momm., IV, 45-46. 375] Agrarian Movements between 367 and 133. 55 of their influence with the Roman citizens and charged with maintaining their interests. Such was the system adopted by Rome. It would have been easy for a person in the compass of a few miles to find villages having the /ws Latii, others with simply the jits Italicum, colonies, prefectures, municipia cum et sine sufragio. The object of the Romans was evident. They planned to govern. Cities alike in interests and patriotic motives were separated by this diversity of rights and the jealousies and hatreds which resulted from it. C(»ncord, which was necessary to any united and general insurrection, was ren- dered impossible between towns, some of which were objects of envy, others, of pity. Their condition, moreover, was such that all, even the most fortunate, had something to gain by showing themselves faithful ; and all, even the most wretched, had something to fear if they did not prove tractable. These Italians, with all the varied privileges and burdens enume- rated above, far outnumbered the Roman citizens.^ A com- parison of the numbers of the census of 115 and that of 70 shows that the numbers of Italians and Romans were ^ as three to two. All these Italians aspired to Roman citizenship, to enjoy the right to vote to which some of their number had been admitted, and the struggle which was sometime to end in their complete emancipation had already commenced. During the first centuries of Roman history, Rome was divided into two classes, patricians and plebeians. The plebeians by heroic efforts had broken down the barriers that separated them from the patricians. The privilege of inter- marriage, the possibility of obtaining the highest offices oi the state, the substitution of the comitia tributa for the other two assemblies, had not made of Rome "an unbridled democ- racy," but all these benefits obtained by tribunician agitation, all the far-reaching advances gained by force of laws and not 1 Momm., Rom. Ge., II, 225. ' I line, IV, 370. 66 Public Lands of the Boman Repuhlic. [376 of arms, had constituted at Rome a single people and created a true Roman nation. There were now at Rome only rich and poor, nobles and proletariat. With intelligence and ability a plebeian could aspire to the magistracies and thence to the senate. Why should not the Italians be allowed the same privilege? It was neither just nor equitable nor even prudent to exclude them from an equality of rights and the common exercise of civil ^ and political liberty. The Gracchi were the first to comprehend the changed state of affairs and the result of Roman conquest and administration in Italy. Their demands in favor of the Italians were profoundly politic. The Italians would have demanded, with arms in their hands, that which the Gracchi asked for them, had not this attempt been made. They failed; Fulvius^ Flaccus, Marius,^ and Livius Drusus * failed in the same attempt, being opposed both by the nobility and the plebs. The agrarian laws, as we have seen, had been proposed by the senate, in the period which we are considering. How was it then that the Gracchi had been compelled to take the initia- tive and that the senate had opposed them ? This contradic- tion is more apparent than real. It explains itself in great part by the following considerations. Upon the breaking down of the aristocracy of birth, the patriciate, the senate was made accessible to the plebeians who had filled the curule magistracies and were possessed of 800,000 sesterces. Knights were also eligible to the senate to fill vacancies, and it was this fact which caused the equestrian order to be called seminarlum senatus. For some time the new nobles, in order to strengthen their victory and make it permanent, had formed an alliance with the plebeians. For this reason were made the concessions and distributions of land which the old sena- tors were unable to hinder. These concessions were the work ' Momui., Lange, Ihne, Long — as given. ^ Momm., Ill, 132. 3 Momm., Ill, 252, 422. * Momm., Ill, 281. 377j Agrarian Movements between S67 and 133. 57 of the plebeians who had been admitted to the senate. But when their position was assured and it ^vas no longer neces- sary for them to make concessions to the commons in order to sustain themselves, they manifested the same passions that the patricians had shown before them. Livy has expressed the situation very clearly : " These noble plebeians had been initiated into the same mysteries, and despised the people as soon as they themselves ceased to be despised by the patricians." ' Thus, then, the unity and fusion which had been established by the tribunician laws disai)peared and there again existed two peoples, the rich and the poor. If we examine into the elements of these two distinct popu- lations, separated by the pride of wealth and the misery and degradation of poverty, we shall understand this. The new nobility was made up partially of the descendants of the ancient patrician gentes who had adapted themselves to the modifications and transformations in society. Of these per- sons, some had adopted the ideas of reform ; they had flattered the lower classes in order to obtain power ; they profited by their consulships and their prefectures to increase or at least conserve their fortunes. Others having business capacity gave themselves up to gathering riches ; to usurious specula- tions which at this time held chief place among the Romans. Even Cato was a usurer and recommended usury as a means of acquiring wealth. Or they engaged in vast speculations in land, commerce, and slaves, as Crassus did a little later. The first mentioned class was the least numerous. To those nobles who gave their attention to money-getting must be added those plebeians who elevated themselves from the masses by means'- of the curule magistracies. These were insolent and purse-proud, and greedy to increase their wealth by any means in their power. Next to these two divisions of the nobility came those whom the patricians had been 1 Livy, XXII, 34. » Ihne, IV, 354-356. 5 58 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [378 wont to despise and to relegate to the very lowest rank under the name of aerarii ; merchants/ manufacturers, bankers, and farmers of the revenues. These men were powerful by reason of their union and community of interests, and money which they commanded. They formed a third order and even became so powerful as to control the senate and, at times, the whole republic'. In the time of the Punic wars the senate had been obliged to let go unpunished the crimes committed by the publican Posthumius and the means which he had employed in order to enrich himself at the expense of the republic, because it was imprudent to oifend^ the order of publicans. Thus constituted an order or guild, they held it in their hands at will to advance or to withhold the money for carrying on wars or sustaining the public credit. In this way they were the masters of the state. They also grasped the public lands, as they were able to command such wealth that no individual could compete with them. They thus became the only farmers of the domain lands, and they did not hesitate to cease paying all tax on these. Who was able to demand these rents from them ? The senate ? But they either composed the senate or controlled it. The magis- trates ? There was no magistracy but that of wealth. The tribunes and the people ? These they had disarmed by fre- quent grants of land of two to seven jugera each, and by the establishment of numerous colonies. This was beyond doubt the real reason for their frequent distributions. They had all been made from land recently conquered. The ancient ager had not been touched, and little by little the Licinian law had fallen into disuetude. ' Ihne, IV, 354-356. * Livy, XX V^, 3 : " Patres ordinem publicanonmi in tali tempore offen- sum nolebant." 379] Agrarian Movements between 367 and 133. 59 Extension of Territory by Conquest between 367 and 133. 1. Caere submitted in 353, yielding all southern Etruria to Rome. 2. Volcian territory and all Latium fell to Rome at the close of the Latin war in 339. 3. Capua, taken in 337. 4. Cales, taken in 334, In this struggle all Campania became Roman territory. 5. Sabine territory submitted in 290. 6. Tarentum, captured in 272. 7. Rhegium, captured in 270. 8. The Galli Senones were destroyed in 283 and their whole territory (Umbria) was confiscated. 9. In 293, Liguria and Transpadana Gallia were added to the Roman confederation. 10. In 222, Italy was extended to its natural boundary, the Alps, by the subjugation of the Gauls north of the Po. Of the entire territory of Italy, 93,640 square miles, fully one-third belonged to Rome. Thus, in the 287 years of the Republic, Roman territory had expanded from 115, to 31,200 square^ miles. At the close of the war with Hannibal, Rome further added to her territory by the confiscation of the greater part of the Gallic territory, Campania, Samnium, Apulia, Lucania, and Bruttii. ^ I have not here added Roman conquests outside of the peninsula of Italy, as these conquests were not treated as Roman territory until nearly a cen- tury later. 60 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [380 Colonies Founded between 367 and 133. (a). Civic Colonies. NO. SIZE OF COLONIES. PLACE. DATES. OF C. ALLOT. JUGERA. ACRES. Antiuin. Latium. 338 300 2 600 375 Anxur. « 329 300 2 600 375 Minturnae. Campania. 296 300 2 600 375 Sinuessa. (( 296 300 2 600 375 Sena Gallica. Umbria. 283 300 6 1,800 1,125 Castrum Novum. Picenum. 283 300 6 1,800 1,125 Aesium. Umbria. 247 300 6 1,800 1,125 Alsium. Etruria. 247 300 6 1,800 1,125 Fregenae. (( 245 300 6 1,800 1,125 Pjrgi. (f 191 300 6 1,800 1,125 Puteoli. Campania. 194 300 6 1,800 1,125 Yolturnum. 11 194 300 6 1,800 1,125 Liternum. a 194 300 6 1,800 1,125 Buxentum. Lucania. 194 300 6 1,800 1,125 Salernum. Campania. 194 300 6 1,800 1,125 Sipontum. (1 194 300 6 1,800 ],125 Tempsa. Bruttii. 194 300 4 1,200 750 Croton. « 194 300 4 1,2C0 750 Potentia. Picenum. 184 300 6 1,800 1,125 Pisaurum. Umbria. 184 300 6 1,800 1,125 Parma. Gall. Cisalp. 183 1,000 6 6,000 3,750 Mutina. lebeians found no employment. Com- petition was impossible between fathers of families and slaves who labored en masse in the vast work-shops of their masters, with no return save the scantiest subsistence, no families, no cares, and most of all no army service. In the country it was still Avorse. It would ajipear that none but slaves were employed in the cultivation of the land. Doubtless the num- ber of slaves in Italy has been greatly exaggerated, but it is certain that the substitution of slave labor for free, was an old fact when Licinius^ attempted by the formal disposition of his law to cheek the evil. In the first centuries of Rome, slaves must have been scarce. They were still dear in the time of Cato, and even Plutarch mentions as a proof of the avarice of the illustrious" censor, that he never })aid more than 15,000 drachmae for a slave. After the great conquests of the Romans, in Corsica, Sardinia, Spain, Greece, and the Orient, the market went down bv reason of the multitude of human ' M. Dureau de la Malle, Ec. polii. des Eoinahis, ch. 15, p. 143; ch. 2, p. 231. ' Plutarch, Cato the Censor, G and 7. 68 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [388 beings thrown upon it. An able-bodied, unlettered man could be bought for the price of an ox. Such were the men of Spain, Thrace, and Sardinia. Educated slaves from Greece and the East brought a higher price. We learn from Horace, that his slave Davus whom he has rendered so celebrated, cost him 500 drachmae.^ Diodorns of Siculus says that the rich caused their slaves to live by their own exertions. According to him the knights employed great bands of slaves in Sicily, both for agricultural purposes and for herding stock, but they furnished them with so little food that they must either starve or live by brigandage. The governors of the island did not dare to punish these slaves for fear of the powerful order which owned them." Slave labor was thus adopted for economic reasons, and, for the same reasons, agriculture in Italy was abandoned for stock raising. Says Varro : ^ " Fathers of families rather delight in circuses and theatres than in farming and grape culture. Therefore, we pay that wheat necessary for our subsistence be imported from Africa and Sardinia ; we pick our grapes in the isles of Cos and Chios. In this land where our fathers who founded Rome instructed their children in agriculture, we see the descendants of those skillful cultivators, by reason of avarice and in contempt of laws, transferring arable lands into pasture fields, perhaps ignorant of the fact that agriculture and father- land were one." Fewer men were needed for the care of these pasture lands ; but the evil did not stop here. Little by little these pasture lands were transformed into mere pleasure grounds attached to villas. This had already begun to take place as early as the second Punic war, when the plains of Slnuessa^ and 'Horace, Sat. II, 7; v. 42-43: "Quid? si me stultior ipso quingentis empto drachmis, deprehenderis." « Dio• iO 78 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [398 if resumed at all, was on a very limited scale. This is made known from the fact that the burgess-roll showed precisely the same number capable of bearing arms in 124 and 114. As has already been stated, the domain land had been ex- hausted by the commission before losing its power, and, there- fore, Gaius had none to distribute.^ The land held by the Latini could only be taken into consideration with the diffi- cult question of the Roman franchise. But when Gaius pro- posed the establishment of colonies in Italy, at Tarentum and Capua, whose territories had been hitherto reserved as a source of revenue to the treasury,^ he went a step beyond his brother and made this also liable to be parcelled out ; not, however, according to the method of Tiberius, who did not contemplate the establishment of new communities, but according to the colonial system. There can be little doubt that Gaius designed to aid in permanently establishing^ the revolution by means of these new colonies in the most fertile part of all Italy. His overthrow and death put a stop to the establishment of the contemplated colonies and left this territory still tributary to the treasury. ' Momm., Ill, 137. * Cicero, De Leg. Agr., II, c. 29-32 ; Marquardt u. Momm., Rom. Alter., IV, 106: "ager publicus mit Ausnahme einiger dem Staate nnenbehrlicher Domainen, wozu namentlich das Gebiet von Capua und das stellalische Feld bei Cales gehorte." 3 Ihne, IV, 438-479. Plutarch, Gams Gracchus, 13. CHAPTER III. Sec. 13. — Lex Thoeia.' According to Appian, during the years which followed the death of Gains Gracchus up to the tribunate of Saturninus, that is to say, between the years 120 and J 00, three agrarian laws were proposed and adopted. 1. A law "That the holders of the land which was the matter in dispute might legally sell ^ it." Appian, who is the only authority for this period, does not give the date of the law nor the name of the tribune who proposed it, but Ihne^ makes the date 118, and Mommsen assigns the law to Marcus * Drusus. This law was a repeal of all the restrictions which the Gracchi had placed upon assignments of public land. The object of this clause was to secure the success of their great reforms, and to establish a number of small proprietors who would cultivate their little farms, and breed citizens and sol- diers. But forced cultivation is impossible, and sumptuary laws have never yet succeeded in increasing^ population. Again it is inconsistent to give land to a man and deprive him of the power of sale, for this is an essential part of that domain which we call property in land. If a man wishes to sell, he ^Rudorff, Ackergesetz des Spuriiis Thorius, Zeitschrift fiir geschichtliche Eechtswissenschaft, Band X, s. 1-158. Corpus Inscriptionuni Latinarum, vol. V, pp. 75-86. Wordsworth, Specimens and Fragments of Early Latin, 440-459. '^Appian, Bell. Gic, I, c. 27. ^Iline, Roman History, V, 9. ^Moium., Rom. Jlist., Ill, 165. ^Long, Decline of the Rom. Rep., I, 352. See Lange, Rom. Alter., Ill, 48. 79 80 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [400 will always have sufficient reasons for so doing, and a rich man can afford to pay ^ the highest price, freedom of exchange thus bringing ultimate good to both parties. It is easy to comprehend the consequences of this law. It was the com- mencement of a reaction entirely aristocratic in its nature.^ It was skillfully conducted with the ordinary spirit of the Roman senate, the ruses, mental reservations, and dissim- ulations under guise of public interest. The aristocracy presented to the plebeian farmers, established by the lex Sempronia, a means of promptly and easily satisfying their passions. They had never earned their little farms, nor did they appreciate the independence of the tiller of the soil. Unaccustomed to farm labor,'' and the plodding unexciting life of the Roman agricola, they made haste to abandon a toilsome husbandry, the results of which seemed to them slow and uncertain, and Math the pieces of silver which they received as the price of their lands, returned to Rome to swell the idle and vicious throng* which enjoyed the sweet privilege of an existence sustained without labor. Thus the nobles re-entered promptly and cheaply into the possession of the lands of Mdiich Tiberius had but a short time before deprived them, and, by means of a little sacrifice, sub- stantially and legally converted their jjossessions into real property, while the plebeians whom Tiberius had wished to elevate by means of forcing ^ upon them the necessity of labor, fell back into their accustomed poverty and brutality. But the object for which the nobles were striving was not yet completely gained. The present victory was theirs ; they now strove to guarantee tlie future, and so render impossible dangers similar to those already passed through. 2. A second law was thus enacted : " Spurius Borius, a tribune, proposed a law to this effect; that there should be ^ Liong, loc. cit. ''Mornin., Ill, 161; Ihne, V, 10. ' Long, loc. dt. *Lange, III, 48-49; Marquardt ii. Momm., IV, 108. "Long, loc. cil. Momm., Ill, 167-168; Ihne, V, 8-10. 401] Lex Thoria. 81 110 more distribution of the public land, but it should be left to the possessors who should pay certain charges (vectigalia) for it to the state (Br]/ji,(p) and that the money arising from these payments should be distributed." ' It is easy to tiomprehend the effect of a law so conceived. On the one hand it guaranteed to the possessors full property in the public lands which they held. From this point of view it was aristocratic. But on the other hand it aimed to unite the interests of the common people with those of the aristocracy, by placing a tax of one tenth of the produce upon the holders of these lands,^ thus reestablishing the law which had been annulled by Drusus. This took the place of distri- butions of land, which had now been made impossible^ in Italy. In reality this law was disastrous to the plebeians as it established a tax * for their benefit, a congiarium, and placed a premium upon laziness. The narration of Appian presents some grave difficulties. In all the manuscripts of Appian the name of the tribune proposing the second law is Spurius Borius." Cicero men- tions a tribune by the name of Spurius •" Thorius and Schweig- hauser in his edition of Appian has changed ' Borius ' to ' Thorius.' But this does not lessen the difficulty, as the law which Cicero attributes to Thorius is entirely different from the second law of Appian which, according to him was introduced by Spurius Borius. Cicero says that Spurius Thorius "freed the public lands from the vectigal."^ Appian says that Spurius Borius guaranteed the po.ssessio7is in the public lands, levying a tax on them for the benefit of the people. It is a sheer waste of time to attempt to harmonize these two statements.'^ Granting that Spurius Borius and ' Appian, I, c. 27. ''Long, ], 353. ^Long, I, 354. Time, V, 10-11. *Long, 1,353; Wordsworth, 440; Momm., Hi, 165, note; Ihne, V, 9; Lange, III, 48; Appian, I, c. 27. "Cicero, Brut, 36. ' Cicero, De Oral., II, 70. ^Marquardt u. Monini., Riim. Alter., IV, 108, n. 4; Wordswortli, 441. 82 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [402 Spurius Thorius are oue and the same person, the statements still remain diametrically opposed according to a simple and commonly accepted translation of Cicero's words : " Sp. Thorius satis valuit in populari genere dicendi, is qui agrum publicum vitiosa et inutile lege vectigali levavit." Mommsen makes Cicero agree with Appian by changing " vectigali " into the instrument, and rendering ^ " relieved the public land from a vicious and useless law by imposing a vectigal." No other writer agrees with Mommsen in making such a translation. 3. The third law is mentioned by Appian alone who says : " Now. when the law of Gracchus had once been evaded by these tricks, an excellent law and most useful to the state if it could have been executed, another tribune not long after {ovTToXv varepov) abolished even the vectigalia."^ This is evidently the same law which Cicero mentions as that of Spurius Thorius and as he also mentions him in another place (De Or., II, 70, 284), we may possibly accept him as the author. There are still extant some fragments of a bronze tablet which contains upon its smooth surface the Lex Repetun- darura and has cut upon its rough ^ back an agrarian law. These fragments were discovered in the 16th century among the collections in the Museum of Cardinal * Bembo at Padua. Sigonius attempted the reconstruction of this law and after him Haubold and Klentze, but Rudorff has completed the reconstruction as far as possible and made the law the sub- ject of an interesting essay .^ Mommsen has a commentary in the Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum'' upon this law. From all these sources the date of this law has been estab- lished almost beyond doubt as 111. Sigonius assigned it 'Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarura, vol. I, p. 74. ^Appian, I, c. 27. =• liong, I, 355 ; Wordsworth, 440. * Long, I, 355; Wordsworth, 440 ; See Rudorff, Ack. des Sp. Thor. *Zeitschrift fiir geschichtliohe Rechtswissenschaft, Band X, s. 1-194. «C. I. L., I, pp. 75-86. 403] Lex Thoria. 83 to Spurius Thorius, and, as the name is immaterial and ^ liis arguments moreover for this title are not easily set aside, we can do no better than adopt it. Argument of the Lex Thoria.' The law evidently consists of three parts, although the rubricae are absent. I. De agro publico p. R. in Italia (1-43). II. De agro publico p. R. in Africa (44-95). III. De agro publico p. R. qui Oorinthorum fuit (96-105). I. On the Ager Publicus in Italy. This part may be divided roughly into three sections: (1) Lines 1-24, defining ager privaius ; (2) 24-32, defining ager publicus ; (3) 33-43, on disputed cases. It thus embraces the first forty-three lines of the law, and is concerned with the public land of Italy, from the Rubicon southwards. It commences by referring to the condition of this land in the year 133, when Tiberius Gracchus was tribune. The law does not aifect to touch any thing which had been enacted concerning this land prior to 133. It either confirms or alters what had been done in 133, and since that time. All the public land which was exempted from the operation of the Sempronian laws, i. e., Ager Campanus and Ager Stellatis, was also excluded from the operation of the lex Thoria. (1) The first ten lines of the law relate to that part of the ager publicus which was occupied before the time of the Gracchi, if the amount of such land did not exceed the maxi- mum fixed by the Sempronian laws ; (2) Also, to the assignments made by lot (sortito) to Roman citizens by the commissioners since the enactment of the Sem- ' Long, I, 356. * Wordsworth, 447. See the text of this hiw in C. I. L., vol. I, pp. 79-80. 84 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [404 pronian laws', if such assignments were not made out of land which had been guaranteed to the old possessors ; (3) Also, to all lands taken from an old possessor, but on his complaint restored to him by the commissioners ; (4) Also, to all houses and lands, in Rome or in other parts of Italy, which the commissioners had granted without lot, so as such grants did not interfere with the guaranteed title of older possessors ; (5) Also, to all the public land which Gains Sempronius, or the commissioners, in carrying out his law, had used in the establishment of colonies or given to settlers, whether Roman citizens, Latini, or Italian Socii, or wdiich they had caused to be entered on the "fo7-mae " or " tabulae.'^ All the lauds comprised in the above are declared in lines seven and eight to be private property, in these words : "Ager locus omnis quel supra scriptus est, extra eum agrum locum, quel ager locus ex lege plebeivescito, quod C. Sempronius Ti. f. tr. pi. rogavit, exsceptum cavitumve est nei divideretur .... privatus esto." Lines 8-10 declare that the censors shall, from time to time, enter this land upon their books like any other private property ; and it is further declared that nothing shall be said or done in the senate to disturb the peaceful enjoyment of this land by those persons possessing it. Of lines 11-13 (ch. II) nothing definite can be said, because of the few words which have been preserved.^ Rudorff explains them as referring to land granted to viasii vicani (dwellers in villages along the roads), by the Sempronian commissioners ; such lands to remain in their possession, but to be theoreti- cally ager publicus. Lines 13-14 refer to lands occupied since 133 agri colendi causa. They allow to every Roman citizen the privilege of occupying, for the purpose of cultivation, thirty jugera of public land ; they further declare that he who shall possess or > LonL', I, 35'j. 405] Lex Thoria. 85 have not more than thirty jugera of such land, shall possess and have it as private property,' with the provision that land so occupied shall be no part of the public land excepted from appropriation, and further, that such occupation shall not interfere with the guaranteed lands of a previous possessor. Ijines 14-15 relate to holders of pasture land {ager compas- cuns). This ager compascuus was land which had been left undivided, and had not become the private propei-ty of any individual, but was the common property of the owners of the adjacent lands. These persons had the right to pasture stock upon this land by paying pasture dues (sanplura or veciigal) to the state. The Thoria lex freed these lands from the veciigal or scriplura, and granted free pasturage to each man for ten head of large beasts — cattle, asses, and horses — and fifty head of smaller animals — sheep, goats, and swine. This common pasture must be carefully distinguished from the communal property which was granted to the settlers in a Colonia and called " comjxiscua publica " with the additional title ^ of the colony, as " JuUenses." These rights of common resemble, in some respects, the English common of pasture as described by Bracton.^ By English customary law, every freeholder holding land within a manor, had the right of common of pasturage on the lord's wastes as an incident to his land. Lines 15-16. The possession of land,- granted by the commissioners in a colony since J 33, to be confirmed before the Ides of March next. Lines 16-17. The same rule applied to lands granted otherwise by the same commissioners. Line 18. Such occupants if forcibly ejected to be restored. Lines 19-20. Land assigned by the Sempronian cora- '"Quom quis ceivis Romanus agri colendi causa in eurn agrum agri jugera non amplius xxx possidebit habebitue, is ager privatus esto." ' Long, loc. cit. ; Wordsworth, 446. ^ Digby, History of the Law of Real Property in England, p. 157. 86 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [406 mission, in compensation for land in a colony which had been made public, to become private. Lines 23-24. Confirmation of the title or restitution of such land to be made before the Ides of March next. Lines 24-2-5. Land besides this which remains public is not to be occupied, but to be left free to the public for graz- ing. A fine for occupation is imposed. The law allowed all persons to feed their beasts great and small on this public pasture, up to the number mentioned in lines 14-15 as the limit to be pastured on the ager campascuus, free of all tax. This, according to Rudorff, was done for the benefit of the small holders. Those who sent more than this number of ani- mals to the public pastures must pay a scriptnra, for each head. Line 26. While the cattle or sheep were driven along the ' calles/ or beast-tracks, and along the public roads to the pasture grounds, no charge was made for what they consumed along the road. Line 27. Land given in compensation out of public land, to be privatus utei quoi optuma lege. Line 27. Land taken in this way from private ownership to he publicus, as in 133. Lines 27-28. Land given in compensation for ager patntus to be itself pair itus. Line 28. Public roads to remain as before. Line 29. Whatever Latins and peregrini might do in 112, and. whatever is not forbidden citizens to do by this law, they may do henceforward. Lines 29-30. Trial of a Latin to be the same as for a Roman citizen. Lines 31-32. Territory (1) of borough towns or colonies (2), in trientabulis, to be, as before, public. Lines 33-34. Cases of dispute about land made private between 133 and 111, or by this law, to be judged by the consul or praetor before next Ides of March. Lines 35-36. Cases of dispute after this date to be tried by consuls, praetors, or censors. 407] Lex Thoria. 87 Lines 36-39. Judgment on money owing to publicani to be given by consuls, proconsuls, praetors or propraetors. Line 40. No one to be prejudiced by refusing to swear to laws contrary to this law. Lines 41-42. No one to be prejudiced by refusing to obey laws contrary to this law. Lines 43-44. On the colony of Sipontum (?). Thus we see that the lex Thoria had two main objects in view: (1) The guaranteeing to possessors full property in the land which they occupied. (2) The freeing from vectigal or scriptura the property of every one. In this way was the reaction of the aristocracy comj)leted. It left nothing of the Sempronian law. Appian ' has fully comprehended all this, and, in his enumeration of the three laws, connection between which he indicates, we see clearly the entire revolutionary system, conducted, we must admit, with a rare address and a perfidy which rendered the effect certain. The aristocracy did not rest. As soon as they had gained the people by their new bait of money and food, soothed them by tlieir apparent generosity, and familiarized them M'ith the idea that the pos>^essions of the nobles were not only legally acquired but inviolable, then they raised the mask, and by a bold step swept away the vedigalj' thus leaving their prop- erty free. The enactment of this law virtually closed the long struggle between patrician and plebeian over the public lands of Rome, and left them as full property in the hands of the rich nobility. The results could hardly have been otherwise. Sumptuary laws, false economic principles, had closed all channels^ of trade and manufacture to the nobility, while conquest had filled their hands with gold and placed at their disposal vast numbers* of slaves. There was but one chan- nel open for the investment of this gold, — the agrarian.^ Farming and cattle-raising were the only occupations in which ' Long, I, 357. * Appian, I, c. 27. ' Long, he. cit. ; lline, loc. cil. * Ihne, loc. cit. ; Long, loc. cit. ' Momm., loc. cit. 88 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [408 slaves could be used with advantage and so, as a natural result of Roman economics, the plebeian, with little or no money and subject to the military call, was compelled to enter into a one-sided contest with capital and slave labor. So long as these conditions existed so long would all the laws of the world fail to save him from abject poverty and its attendant evils. Sec. 14. — Agrarian Movements between 111 and 86. In the year following the enactment of the lex Thoria, or, by some other authorities, in 105, an agrarian law was proposed by a tribune named Marcus Philippus. Cicero is the only writer who mentions it, and he has given us no information concerning its tendency and dispositions. We only know from him that it was rejected.^ Probably the whole thing \\as merely a political ruse in order to gain an election or to be handsomely bought off by the nobility. It, however, pre- sents one point of interest to us. The introduction of the bill was preceded by a speech, in which the tribune, in justifying his undertaking, affirmed that there were not two thousand citizens who had wealth. Cicero has made no attempt to refute this, and must, therefore, have judged it true. It reveals the fact that Rome was in a deplorable condition. In chronological order the first agrarian law after the vain attempt of Philippus was that of Lucius Appuleius Saturninus. In the year 100, he brought forward a bill for the distri- bution of land in Africa^ to the soldiers of Marios. Each soldier was to receive one hundred jugera of land. No dis- tinction was to be made between Roman and Latin. This ^Cie.,DeOff., II, 21. ' Lucius Appuleius Saturniuus, tribunus plebis seditiosus ut gratiam Ma- rianorum militum pararet, legem tulit ut veteranis centena agri jugera in Africa dividerentur .... Siciliam, Achaiam, Macedoniam novis colonis destinavit; et aurum, dolo an scelere, Caepionis partum, ad emtionem agrorum convertit. Aurel. Victor. DeVir. Illus., 73. 409] Agrarian Movements between 111 and 86. 89 bill received the sanction of the assembly and became a law, but force was the chief instrumentality in bringing this about. This law, so far as can be ascertained, was never enforced, so that when the same man, three years later, brought forward another agrarian bill, he took the precaution to add a clause binding every senator, under heavy penalty, to confirm the law by the most solemn oath.' The first law was enacted in order to provide the soldiers of Marius with suitable farms when they returned from the campaign in Numidia. The author doubtless acted with the aid and hearty cooperation of Marius. When Saturninus brought forward his second bill, Marius^ had returned from the north as the hero of Aquae Sextiae and was present to help. The nobility as one man opposed the scheme ; the town-people were the clients of the rich. If Marius^ and Saturninus were to succeed, it must be by the aid of the country burgess and the soldier. With the legions that fought at Vercellae drawn up in the town, amid riot and bloodshed, the assembly passed the bill. The senate, together with Marius himself, for a time demurred from tak- ing the oath. Finally,* at the instigation of " the man from the ranks," who had come to the conclusion that it was best to subscribe, all save one, Metellus, took the oath. The law enacted that assignments of land in the country of the Gauls, in Sicily, Achaia, and Macedonia, should be made; that colonies should be established, and that Marius should be the head of the commission entrusted with the establishment of all these settlements.^ These colonies were to consist of Roman citi- zens ; and, in order that Latini,^ their companions in arras, might participate in the grants, Marius was invested with power to bestow the franchise upon a certain number of these. But no one of these colonies was ever founded. The only ' App., I, 29 ; Plutarch, Marius, 29. * Plutarch, Marius, loc. cii. =* App., Bell. Cv\, I, 30-33. * App., loc. cit. * Aurelius Victor, 73. "Cicero, De Oral., II, c. 7, 1 ; -pro Balbo, XIV ; pro Kabirio, XI. 7 90 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [410 colony of the year 100 was Eporedia ^ (Ivrea), in the north- western Alps, and it is not likely that this was established in accordance with the provisions of the enactment. The law was to take effect in 99, and a change of party took place before that time which sent Marius into practical banishment and rewarded his partisan, Satnrninus, with death. The optimates who were now in office paid no attention to the law, and the senators forgot their oath. Another injnry is added to the many which the Latini had suffered. In the year 99, i. e., in the year following the death of Saturninus, an agrarian law was proposed by the tribune Titius, but we know nothing of its conditions. Cicero is the only writer who mentions it and even his text is doubtful.^ According to one of his statements Titius was banished because he had preserved a portrait of Saturninus, and the knights deemed him for this reason a seditious citizen. Valerius Maximus, who without doubt borrowed his facts from Cicero, states that " Titius had rendered himself dear to the people by having^ brought forward an agrarian law." Cicero mentions in another place, the lex Titia* upon the same page as the lex Saturnina and implies that it had been enacted. If so it was disregarded and thus rendered void. In 91 an agrarian law was proposed by Livius Drusus, the son of the adversary of Gaius Gracchus, and, with his new judiciary, the measure was carried and became a law.^ The Italians were embraced in this law and were to have equal rights with Roman citizens, but Drusus died before he had time to carry his law into execution, and his law died with him. ' Long, I. * Cicero, P7'0 liabirio, 9. ^ Val. Max., VIII, 1, ^ 2: "Sext. Titius . . . agraria lege lata gratiosus apud populum." * De Legibus, II, 6. De Oral., II, 11. ^Ihne, V, 176-186; App., I, 35; Val. Max., IX, 5, 2: Cicero, De Oral., Ill, 1 ; Livy, EpiL, 71. 411] Effect of the Sullan Revolution. 91 Sec, 15. — Effect of the Sullan Revolution. As soon as Sulla found himself established, he caused a bill to pass the Coniitia Centuriata l>y means of which he was empowered to inflict punishment upon certain Italian communities. For the accomplishment of this purpose com- missioners were appointed to cooperate with the garrisons established throughout all Italy. The less guilty were required to pay fines, pull down their walls, and raze their citadels.' Those that had been guilty of continued opposition, as Samnium, Lucania, and Etruria, had their territory in whole or in part confiscated, their municipal rights cancelled, immunities taken from them, which had been granted by old treaties, and the Roman franchise,^ which they had been granted by the Cinnan government, annulled. Such persons received, instead, the lowest Latin rights which did not even imply membership in any community and rendered them destitute of civic constitution and the right of making a testament.^ This latter treatment applied only to those whose land was confiscated. Thus Sulla vindicated the majesty of the Republic and at the time avoided furnishing his enemies with a nucleus in Italian communities. In Campania, the democratic colony established at Capua by Cinna * was done away with and the domain given back to the state, thus becoming ager publious. The whole territory of Praeneste and Norba in Latium, and Spoletium in Umbria was confiscated. The town of Sulmo in Pelio-nium was razed. But more direful than all this was the punishment which fell upon Etruria ^ and Samnium. These people had marched upon Rome and, with the avowed determination of ' App., Bell. Civ., I, 94-100; Livy, Epit., 89. PlutarcJi, Life of Sulla. «Ihne, V, 39L ^Moium., Ill, 428, note. See article on Sulla, in Brittannica. ^Momoi., Ill, 401. ^Moram., Ill, 429; Ihne, V, 392; Long. 92 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [412 exterminating the Roman people, liad engaged in battle at the Colline gate. They were utterly destroyed and their country left desolate. The territory of Samnium was not even opened up for settlement, but left as a lair for wild beasts. Henceforth from the Rubicon to the Straits of Sicily there were to be none but Romans; the laws and the lan- guage of the whole peninsula were to be the laws ^ and the language of Rome. To accomplish such an object as this, it was not enough to destroy and make desolate, it became necessary to repopulate the waste places and rebuild that which had been torn down. Roman citizens had to be sent as colonists into the desolate regions. Sulla, accordingly, undertook to carry out his plans of colonization, the grandest and most comprehensive which Rome had ever seen, and which indeed have had no parallel in history till the settlement of the north of Ireland by Cromwell and William III. The arrangements as to the property of the Italian soil placed at the disposal of Sulla ^ all the Roman domain lands which had been placed in usufruct to the allied communities, and which now reverted to the Roman govern- ment. It also placed at his disposal all the confiscated territo- ries of the communities incurring punishment. Upon these territories he established military colonies, and thus obtained a three-fold result.^ He remunerated his soldiers for the faithful service rendered him in long years of toil and danger. He repeopled the regions desolated by war (except Samnium). He provided a military protection for himself and the new constitution which he established. Most of his new settlements were directed to Etruria, Faesu- lae and Arretium being among the number; others, to Latium* and Campania, where Praeneste and Pompeii became Sullan ' Momm., Ill, 429. ' Momrn., loc. cil. ; Ihne, V, 391-395. ^Momm., 111,429. ^Momm., Ill, 430; Marquaidt u. Momm., Rom. Alter., IV, 111, totam Italiam suis praesidiis obsidere atque ocupare ; Cicero, De Leg. Ayr., 2, 28, 75. 413] Agrarian Movements between 86 and 59. 93 colonies. A great part of these colonies were, after the Grac- chan manner, merely grafted upon town-communities already existing. The comprehensiveness of these settlements may be seen in this fact that 20,000 allotments were * made in different parts of Italy. Notwithstanding this vast disposal of territory, Sulla gave lands to the temple of Diana at Mt. Tifata, while the territory of Volaterrae and Arretium remained undisturbed. He also revived the old plan of occupation which had been legally forbidden in the year 118. Many of Sulla's intimate friends availed themselves of this method of becoming masters of large estates. Sec. 16. — Agrarian Movements between 86 and 59. The first agrarian movement after the Sullan Revolution was that inaugurated by the tribune Rullus. This has be- come the most famous of all the agrarian laws because of the speeches made against it by the great adversary of Rullus, Cicero, who succeeded in defeating the measure by reason of his brilliant rhetoric. Plutarch ^ has thus analyzed this proposition. " The tribunes of the people proposed danger- ous innovations ; they demanded the establishment of ten magistrates with absolute power, who, while disposing, as masters, of Italy, Syria, and the new conquests of Pompey, should have the right to sell the public lands; to prosecute those whom they wished; to banish; to establish colonies; to draw upon the public treasury for whatever money they had need ; to levy and maintain what troops they deemed necessary. The concession of so widely extended power gained for the support of the law the most powerful men in Rome. The colleague of Cicero, Antonius, was one of the ' App., I, 100; Cicero, De Legibus Agrariis, II, 28, 78; Ihne, V, 394; Marquardt u. Momm., IV, 111 ; Zunipt, Comm. Epigr., 242-246; Cicero, yid Alt., 1, 19, 4 : " Volaterranos et Arretinos, quornm agrnm Sulla piiblicarat." * Plutarch, acero, 16-17. 94 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [414 first to favor it, in the hope of being one of the decemvirs. Cicero opposed the new law in the senate and his eloquence so completely overpowered even the tribunes that they had not one word to reply. But they returned to the charge and having gained the support of the people, they brought the matter before the tribes. Cicero was in no way alarmed ; he left the senate, appeared on the rostrum before the people and spoke with so great force that he not only caused the law to be rejected but took from the tribunes all hope of being suc- cessful in similar enterprises." In 61 we find Cicero advocating a bill similar in nature to the one he had so brilliantly combatted in 64. In the last instance, however, the law was proposed by Pompey, and in favor of Pompey 's soldiers and that made all diiference to a man who ever curried favor with the great. Flavins, who proposed this law, was but the creature of Pompey. Cicero has made known to us, in one of his letters to Atticus, the conditions of the law which Flavins proposed and the modi- fications which he himself wished to apply to it. Flavins proposed to distribute lands both to the soldiers of Pompey and the people ; to establish colonies ; to use for the purchase of the lands for colonization, the subsidies which should accrue in five years, from the recently conquered territories.^ The senate rejected this law entirely, in the same spirit of opposi- tion which it had shown to all agrarian laws, probably think- ing that Pompey would thereby obtain too great an increase of power.^ This was the last attempt at agrarian legislation until the year 59, when Julius Csesar enacted his famous law. 'Cicero, Ad. Alt., I, 19. ' Ibid. : " Huic toti rationi agrariae senatus adversabatur, snspicans Pompeio novam quaindam potentiam quaeri." 415] Lex Julia Agraria. 95 Sec. 17. — Lex Julia Agraria. During the first consulship of Cains Julius Caesar, he brought forward an agrarian^ bill at the instigation of his confederates. The main object of this bill was to furnish land to the Asiatic army ^ of Pompey. In fine, this bill was little more than a renewal of a bill presented by Pompey the previous year (58), but rejected. Appian gives the following account of this bill : " As soon as Caesar and Bibulus^ (his colleague) entered on the consulship, they began to quarrel and to make preparation to support their parties by force. But Caesar who possessed great powers of dissimulation, addressed Bibulus in the senate and urged him to unanimity on the ground that their disputes would damage the public interests. Having in this way obtained credit for peaceable intentions, he threw Bibulus oif his guard, who had no suspicion of what was going on, while Caesar, meanwhile, was marshalling a strong force, and introducing into the senate laws for favoring the poor, under which he proposed to dis- tribute land among them and the best land in Italy, that about* Capua which at the present time was let on public account.^ He proposed to distribute this land among heads of families who had three children, by which measure he could gain the good will of a large multitude, for the number of those who had three children was 20,000. This proposal met with opposition from many of the senators, and Caesar, pretending to be nuich vexed at their unfair behavior, left the house and never called the senate together again during the 1 Livy, Epit., 103. - Momm., IV, 244. ^App., 5e//. Oit)., II, c. 10. * Compare Dio Cassius, Bk., XXXVI II, c. 1 : "Tt;;/ 5« x'^P°-^ '^V ^e koiv))v aira(rav ttA^;* ttjs KafiTravlSos fVffie, TavTrjv yap iv rf Stjuoctici.' i^aiperov Sia ttjj/ aperriv Cicero, ad AtL, VIII, 4. •Dion Cassius, 45, c. 12; Cicero, ad Alt., X, 8. 2 Cicero, Phil., II, 39: "agrum Campanum, qui cum de vectigalibus exiuiebatur, ut militibus daretur." Marquardt u. Momin., Rom. Alter. IV. 114. *Momm., IV, 244. » Momm., Ill, 392, 428. « Alomm., Ill, 392, 428. 98 Public Lands of the Romian Republic. [418 Wherever the new settlers were brought in, the old cultivators were turned out. No ancient writer says anything about the condition of these people. Cicero, in his second speech upon the land bill of RuUus, when speaking of the consequences that would follow its enactment, declared that if the Campa- nian cultivators were ejected they would have no place to go, and he truly says that such a measure would not be a settle- ment of plebeians upon the land, but an ejection and expul- sion of them from it.^ Did it pay to send out a swarm of 100,000 idle paupers ^ who, for two generations, had been fed at the public charge from the corn-bins of Rome, simply in order that a like number of honest peasants, who had been not only self-sup- porting but had paid a large part of the Roman revenue, should be compelled to sacrifice their goods in a glutted market and become debauched and idle ? Sec. 18. — Disteibution of Land after the Civil War between C^sar and Pompey. After Pompey had been vanquished at Pharsaiia, and the republicans in Africa, Csesar proceeded to distribute lands to his soldiers in accordance with his promise to give them lands, " not by taking them from their proprietors as Sulla did ; not by mixing colonists with citizens despoiled of their goods and thus breeding perpetual strife, — but by dividing both public land and his own private property,^ and, if this were not sufficient, by buying wliat was needed." Appian says that Casar did not succeed in carrying out these promises in full, but that veterans were in some cases settled upon lands legally belongiug to others.* However, his soldiers were not Imddled together like those of Sulla, in military colonies of ' Cicero, RuL, II, c. 31. « Cicero, Phil., II, 17. 3App., 94. ••App, II, 120. 419] Disti'ibution of Land after the Civil War. 99 their own, but wlien they settled in Italy they were scattered ' as much as possible throughout the entire peninsula in order to make them more easily amenable to the laws.^ In Cam- pania, where Ciesar had lands at his disposal, the soldiers were settled in colonies, and so, close together. According to a letter of Cicero to Paetus, among the lands distributed were those of Veii and Capena. Historians have estimated that there were 100,000 soldiers who received lands in Italy by this distribution. Sec. 19. — Distributions from the Death of C^sar TO THE Time of Augustus. The death of Csesar in no way stopped the assignment of lands, but rather rendered all possession of land in Italy unsafe. A few weeks after his death two new laws were promulgated, one by the tribune, Lucius Antonius,^ a lex agraria, and the other the lex de eolonis in agros deducendis by the consul Marcus Antonius. The first was enacted on the 5th of June,* and ordered that all the ager jmhlicus still at the disposal of the state, including the Pomptine marshes which Cpesar had at one time planned to drain, but had not, be divided among the veterans and citizens. It was abrogated by a senatus consultum of the 4th of January, 43,^ but was nevertheless carried into execution almost immediately with great relentlessness towards the enemies^ of Antonius. The second, the Lex Antonia, perished in April of 44, and had as a result the establishment of a colony near Casilinum/ which Csesar had alreadv colonized : tlie remainder of the domain 'Long; Momiu. -Suetonius, Julius Ccesar, 38. ^L. Langii, Conimentationis de Legibus Antoniis a Cicerone Phil., V, 4, 10 ; Commemoratis particula prior et posterior ; Lipsiae, 1882 ; Lange, Rom. Alter., Ill, 499, 503, 526; Marquardt u. Momiu., Edm. Alter., IV, 116. * Lange, Comm., II, 14. * Cicero, Phil., VI, 5, 14 ; XI, 6, 13. « Phil., V, 7, 20. ' Langii, Comm., II, 14. 100 Public Lands of the Roman Republic. [420 lands, the ager Campanus and ager Leontinus, was converted into a reward for the supporters of Antonius/ This was also set aside by the new law of the consul C. Vibius Pansa, in February, 43.' Second Triumvirate. When Antony, Lepidus, and Octavius were reconciled, thus forming the second triumvirate, the treaty sanctioning this new state of affairs stipulated, in favor of the soldiers, a new distribution of lands, i. e., a new agra- rian law ; Appian says : — " In order to increase the zeal of the army, the triumvirs promised to the soldiers, indepen- dent^ of other results of victory and a gratuity of colonies, 18 Italian towns, important by means of their wealth and the richness of their lands. These were divided among the sol- diers with their lands and buildings, as conquered towns. Anaong the number were Capua, Rhegiura, Vemisia, Bene- ventum, Nuceria and Vibo. Thus the most beautiful part of Italy became the prey of the soldiers." Dion Cassius, Suetonius and Velleius Paterculus all men- tion these assignments. After the battle of Philippi and the defeat and death of Brutus and Cassius, 1 70,000 men were provided for, in accordance with these promises, out of the goods of the proscribed and the lands confiscated to the state. The lands of the towns mentioned in Appian were taken under the form of a forced sale, but the purchase money was never paid owing to the bankrupt condition of the treasury. If we examine into the nature of these agrarian laws since the death of Julius Ciesar, we shall find that they differ in all respects from previous enactments : 1. They were executed at the expense not only of public domains but also of private property. 'Cic, Phil., II, 17, 43; II, 39, 101; III, 9, 22; VIII, 8, 26; Dio Cass., 45, 30 ; 46, 8. «Cic., Phil., V, 4, 10; V, 19, 53; X, 8, 17; VIII, 15, 31. ^ " A6(re. 421] DistHbulion of Land after the Civil War. 101 2. They were the work of one man and not of the entire people. 3. The name of the people was never mentioned in these laws; they were enacted wholly for the profit of the soldiery. Before the distributions made by the triumvirate, the public lands had been absorbed, or at least the fragments remaining were in no way sufficient to recompense the service of the veterans. Upon the establishment of the empire, the public lands became a vast manorial estate whose over-lord was the emperor himself. FINIS. THE JOHNS HOPKINS PRESS I. American Journal of Mathematics. S. Newcomb, Editor, and T. Craig, Associate Editor. Quarterly. 4to. Volume XIII in progress. $5 per volume. II. American Chemical Journal. I. Remsen, Editor. 8 nos. yearly. 8vo. Volume XIII in progress. $4 per volume. III. American Journal of Philology. B. L. Gii.dersleeve, Editor. Quarterly. 8vo. Volume XII in progress. $3 per volume. IV. Studies from the Biological Laboratory. H. N. Martin, Editor, and W. K. Brooks, Associate Editor. 8vo. Volume V in progress. $5 per volume. V. Studies in Historical and Political Science. H. B. Adams, Editor. Monthly. Svo. Vol. IX in progress. $3 per volume. VI. Johns Hopkins University Circulars. 4to. Vol. X in progress. $1 per year. VII. Johns Hopkins Hospital Bulletin. 4to. Monthly. $1 per year. VIII. Johns Hopkins Hospital Reports. 4to. $5 per year. IX. Contributions to Assyriology, etc. Vol. I ready. $8. X. Annual Report of the Johns Hopkins University. Presented by the President to the Board of Trustees. XI. Annual Register of the Johns Hopkins University. Giving the list of officers and students, and stating the regulations, etc. Published at the dose of the academic year. Rowland's Photograph op the Normal Solar Spectrum. New edition now ready. Set of ten plates, mounted. $20. The Oyster. By William K. Brooks! 240 pp., 12mo. 14 plates. $1.00. The Teaching of the Apostles (complete facsimile edition). J. Rendel Harris, Editor. 110 pp. and 10 plates. 4to. $5.00, cloth. Observations on the Embryology of Insects and Arachnids. By Adam T. Bruce. 46 pp. and 7 plates. $3.00, cloth. Selected Morphological Monographs. W. K. Brooks, Eklitor. Vol. I. 370 pp. and 51 plates. 4to. $7.50, cloth. Reproduction in Phototype of a Syriac MS. with the Antilegomena Epistles. I. H. Hall, Editor. $3, paper ; $4, cloth. Studies in Logic. By members of the Johns Hopkins University. C, S. Peirce, Editor. 123 pp., 12mo. $2.00, cloth. New Testament Autographs. By J. Rendel Harris. 54 pp. 8vo ; 4 plates. 50 cents. The Constitution of Japan, with Speeches, etc., illustrating its significance. 48 pp., 16mo. 50 cents. Essays and Studies. By Basil L. Gildersleeve. 520 pp., small 4to. $3.50, cloth. A full list of publications will be sent on application. Communications in respect to exchanges and remittances may be sent to The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, Maryland. JOHN MURPHY & GO'S NEW PUBLICATIONS. A. BOOK KOR THE TIMES. OUR CHRISTIAN HERITAGE. By His Eminence Cardinal Gibbons. One Volume, 12nio. Cloth. 524: pages. Price $1.00. It is a noble work, in execution as well as conception. — New York Herald. The Agnostic, as he lays down the book, will be inclined to say, with King Agrippa, "Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian." — New York Sun. SECOND REVISED EDITION. HERBDITY. By W. K. BROOKS, Jolins Hopkins University. One Volume. 12mo. Cloth. Price $2.00. This work combines in a very unusual degree the two traits that are so rarely found to coexist in scientific books: it is both original and independent in its views, and is at the same time a most lucid and popular presentation of its subject. — Popular Science Monthly. 1791; AXAIvK OK SAN DOMINQO. An Authentic Account of the Uprising of the Negroes iu lYOl which destroyed the famous old French Colony. By- E . -VSr. GII^LIA.]VI, R/I.D. 1 Volume. 12mo. Cloth. Net, $1. The study of the situation and a quiet but eflfective style makes " 1791 " a story of more than ordinary interest. — Baltimore Sun. The material for this most interesting story was gathered from facts connected with the slave insurrection on the island of San Domingo in 1791. — Telegraph. SCIKNCK AND SCIKN^riSTTS. Some Papers on Natural History, by the Eev. JOHN GERARD, S. J. Contents: — Mr. Grant Allen's Botanical Fables— Who Painted the Flowers— Some ■Wayside Problems — Behold the Birds of the Air — How Theories are Manufactured — Instinct and its Lessons. 1 Volume. 12m,o. Cloth, 40 cents net. The author starts out by refuting some of Grant Allen's botanical assertions, and he does it so neatly that the most interesting l^iiglish naturalist is literally knocked down with a feather. He also, very frankly, attacks the evolutionists and Darwinians, but giving us no more plausible theories as to who painted the flowers and the berries, or who taught the birds to sing, except that, "These are Thy glorious works, Parent of good." JOHN MURPHY & CO., Publishers, Baltimore. PERtODICALS PUBLISHED BY FEI^IX ALCAN io8 Boulevard Saint-Germain, PARIS. Revue Historique. Edited by M. G. Monod, Lecturer at the Ecole NormaU Suptrieure, Adjunct Director of the Ecole des Haules Eludes. 16th Year, 1891. Tlie " Revue Historique" appeara bi-monthly, making at the end of the year three volumes of 500 pages each. Each number contains: I. Several leading articles, including, if possible, a complete thesis. II. Miscellanies, composed of unpublished documents, short notices on curious histor- ical points. III. Historical reports, furnishing information, as complete as possible, touching the progress of historical studies. I V. An analysis of periodicals of France and foreign countries, from the standpoint of historical studias. V. Critical reports of new historical works. By original memoirs in each number, signed with the names of authorities in the science, and by reports, accounts, chronicles and analysis of periodicals, this review furnishes information regarding the historical movement as complete as is to be found in any similar review. Earlier series are sold separately for 30 frs., single number for 6 frs., numbers of the first year are sold for 9 frs. Price of subscription, in Postal Union, 33 frs. Annales de I'Ecole Libre des Science Politiques. Published iri-morUhly by the OodpercUion of Professors and Former Pupils of the College. 6th Year, 1891. Committee of publication : MM. Boutmy, Director of the College ; LfiON Say, Member oi the Acadijmie Fran^aise, formerly Minister of Finance ; A. de Foville, Professor at the Conservatory of Arts and Trades, Cliief of the Bureau of Statistics in the Mioistry of Finance (Treasury Department) ; E. Stourm, formerly Inspector of the Finances and Administrator of Indirect Taxes; Auo. Arnaune; A. Ribot, Deputy; Gabriel Alix; L. Renault, Professor at the Law College of Paris; Andr6 Lebov, Chief of the Cabinet of the President of the .Senate • Albert .Sokicl; Pioeonneau, Substitute Professor at the College de Paris ; A. Vandal, Audi- tor of the First Class. The subjects treated include the whole field covered by the programme of instruction : Political I'^conomy, Finance, Statistics, Constitutional History, Public and Private International Law, Law of Administration, Comparative Civil and Commercial Legislation, Legislative and Parliamentary History, Diplomatic History, Economic Geography, Ethnography. The Annals besides contain Bibliographical Notices and Foreign Correspondence. Subscription in Postal Union, 19 frs. Revue Phiosophique de la France et de I'Etranger. Eliled by Th. Ribot, Professor at the College of France. 16th Year, 1891. The "Revue Philosophique" appeara monthly, and makes at the end of each year two Tolumes of about G80 pages each. Each number of the " Revue " contains : 1. Essays. 2. Accounts of new philosophical pub- lications, French and foreign. 3. Complete accounts of periodicals of foreign countries as far as they concern philosophy. 4. Notes, documents, observations. The earlier series are sold separately at 30 frs. and at 3 frs. by number. In Postal Union, 33 frs. Subscriptions to be paid in advance. Payment may bo for the periodicals through postal orders. The publisher will allow all expenses for money orders to be charged to him. The American Journal of Archeology AND OF THE HISTORY OF THE FINE ARTS. The Journal is the organ of the Archaeological Institute of America, and of the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, and it will aim to further the interests for which the Institute and the School were founded. It treats of all branches of Archaeology and Ai-t History : Oriental, Classical, Early Christian, Mediaeval and American. It is intended to supply a record of the important work done in the field of Archaeology, under the following categories : I. Original Arti- cles ; II. Correspondence from European Archaeologists ; III. Eeviews of Books ; IV. Archaeological News, presenting a careful and ample record of discoveries and investigations in all parts of the world ; V. Summaries of the contents of the prin- cipal archfeological periodicals. The Journal is published quarterly, and forms a yearly volume of about 500 pages royal 8vo, with colored, heliotype and other plates, and numerous figures, at the subscription price of $5.00. Six volumes have been jDublishcd. It has been the aim of the editors that the Journal, beside giving a survey of the whole field of Archaeology, should be international in character, by affording to the leading archaeologists of all countries a common medium for the i^ublication of the results of their labors. This object has been in great part attained, as is shown by the list of eminent foreign and American contribiitors to the three volumes already issued, and by the character of articles and correspondence published. Not only have important contributions to the advance of the science been made in the original articles, but the present condition of research has been brought before our readers in the departments of Correspondence, and Reviews of the more important recent books. Two departments in which the Journal stands quite alone are (1) the Record of Discoveries, and (2) the Summaries of Periodicals, In the former a detailed account is given of all discoveries and excavations in every portion of the civilized world, from India to America, especial attention being given to Greece and Italy. In order to insure thoroughness in this work, more than sixty periodical publications are consulted, and material is secured from special correspondents. In order that readers should know everything of importance that appears in periodical literature, a considerable space has been given to careful summaries of the papers contained in the principal periodicals that treat of Archaeology and the Fine Arts. By these various methods, all important work done is concentrated and made accessible in a convenient but scholarly form, equally suited to the specialist and to the general reader. All literary communications should be addressed to the managing editor, A. L. FROTHINGHAM, Jr., PEINCETON, N. J. All business communications to the publishers, GINN &• COMPANY., BOSTON, MASS. MODERN LANGUAGE NOTES With inlennission from July to October inclusive. DEVOTED 10 THE INTERESTS OF THE ACADEMIC STUDY OF ENGLISH, GERMAN, AND THE ROMANCE LANGUAGES. A. Marshall Elliott, Managing Editor. James W. Bright, H, C. G. von Jagemann, Henry Alfred Todd, Associate Editors. This is a successful and widely-known periodical, managed by a corps of professors and instructors in the Johns Hopkins University, with the co-operation of many of the leading college professors, in tlie department of modern languages, throughout the country. While undertaking to maintain a high critical and scientific standard, the new journal will endeavor to engage the interest and meet the wants of the entire class of serious and progressive modern- language teachers, of whatever grade. Since its establishment in .January, 1S86, the journal has been repeatedly enlarged, and has met with constantly increasing encouragement and success. The wide range of its articles, original, critical, literary and pedagogical, by a number of the foremost American (and European) scholars, has well represented and recorded the recent pro- gress of modern language studies, both at home and abroad. The list of contributors to Modern Language Notes, in addition to the Editors, includes the following names ; — ANDEissoN, Melville B., State University of Iowa ; Bancroft, T. Whiting, Brown Univer- sity, K. I. ; Baskekvill, W. M., Vanderbilt University, Tenn.: Bocher, Ferdinand, Harvard University, i\Iass. ; Bkadlky, C. B., University of California, Cal. ; Brandt, H. C. G., Hamilton College, N. Y. ; Browne, Wm. Hand, Johns Hopkins University, Md. ; Burnham, Wm. H., Johns Hopkins University, Md.; Carpenter, Wm H., Columbia College, IS. Y,; ClSdat, L., Faculty des Lettres, Lyons, France; Cohn, Adolphe, Harvard University, Mass.; Cook, A. S., Yale University; C0SI.IN, P. J., University of Leyden, Holland; Crane, T. F., Cornell Univer- sity, N. Y. ; Davidson, Thomas, Orange, N. J. ; Egge, Albert E., St. Olaf's College, Minn.; Fay, E. a., National Deaf-Muto College, Washington, D. C. ; Fortier, Alcek, Tulaue Uni- versity, La.; Garner, Samuel, U. S. Naval Academy; Gerber, A., Earlham College, Ind.; Grandgent, Charles, Harvard University, Mass.; Gummere, F. B., The Swain Free School, .Mass.; Hart, J. M., University of Cincinnati, Ohio; Hempl, Geo., University of Michigan; Hubs, II. C. O., Princeton College, N. J.; von J.^gemann, H. C. G., Harvard University; Karsten, Gustaf, University of Indiana, Ind. ; Lang, Henry R., The Swain Free School, Mass.; Learned, M. D., Johns Hopkins University, Md.; Leyh, Edw. F., Baltimore, Md ; Lodeman, A., State Normal School, Mich. ; Morfill, W. R., Oxford, England ; McCabe, T., Johns Hopkins University, Md.; McEluoy, John (i. K., University of Pennsylvania, Pa.; O'Connor, B. F., Columbia College, N. Y. ; Primer, Sylvester, Providence, R. I. ; Schelk De Verb, M., University of Virginia, Va. ; Schilling, Hugo, Wittenberg College, Oliio; Sheldon, Edw. S., Harvard University, Mass.; Shepherd, H. E., College of Charleston, S. C. ; Schmidt, H., University of Deseret, Salt Lake City. Utah; Sievkrs, Eduard, University of Tiibingen, Germany; Smyth, A. H., High School of Philadelphia, Pa.; Stoddard, Francis H., University of City of New York; StOkzinoer, J. J., Bryn Mawr College, Pa.; Thomas. Calvin, University of Michigan, Mich.; Walter, E. L., University of Michigan, Mich.; Warren, F. M., Johns Hopkins University, Md. ; White, H. S., Cornell University, N. Y. Subscription Price One Dollar and Fifty Cents Per Annum, Payable in Advance. Foreign Countries $1.75 per annum. Single Copies Twenty Cents. Specimen pages sent on application. Subscriptions, advertisements and all business communications should be addressed to the Managing Editor of Modern Language Notes, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Md. SIOMES IN ilSIOR!, ECONOilCS m PUBLIC LAI. EDITED BY THE UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF COLUMBIA COLLEGE. The monographs are chosen mainly from among the doctors' dissertations in Political Science, but are not necessarily confined to these. Only those studies are included which form a distinct contribution to science and which are positive works of original research. The monographs are published at irregular intervals, but are paged consecutively as well as separately, so as to form completed volumes. The first four numbers in the series are : 1. The Divorce Problem— A Study in Statistics. By Walter F. Willcox, Ph. D. Price 50 cents. 2. The History of Tariff Administration in the United States, from Colonial Times to the McKinley Adminis- trative Bill. By John Dean Goss, Ph. D. Price 50 cents. 3. History of Municipal Land Ownership on Manhat- tan Island. By George Ashton Black, Ph. D. (In Press.) 4. Financial History of Massachusetts. By Charles H. J. Douglas. (Ready in October, 1891.) Other numbers will be announced hereafter. For further particulars apply to PROFESSOR EDWIN R. A. SEUGMAN, Columbia College, New York. American Economic Association. PUBLICATIONS. A series of monographs on a great variety of economic subjects, treated in a scientific manner by authors well known in the line of work they here represent. Among the subjects presented are Cooperation, Socialism, the Laboring Classes, AVages, Capital, Money, Finance, Statistics, Prices, the Relation of the State and Municipality to Private Industry and various Public Works, the Railway Question, Road Legislation, the English Woolen Industry, and numerous other topics of a like nature. The latest publication is that for January-March, 1891, — Vol. VI, No. 1-2 :— REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS AT THE FOURTH ANNUAL MEETING. F»rice One Dollar. Five volumes of these publications, containing thirty numbers, are now complete. They will be sent:— bound in Cloth, at $5 each ; any two for $9; any three for $13; any four for $17; and all five for $21; all five volumes bound in half morocco, $23.50; single volumes in half morocco $5.50, Unbound, $4 per volume. Forwarded post-paid. Subscription to Vol. VI, $4.00. Annual membership $3 ; life membership $50. Address, RICHARD T. ELY, Secretary. Baltimore, Md. THE REPUBLIC OF NEW HAVEN. A History of Municipal Evolution. By CHARLES H. LEVERMOEE, Ph. D. {Extra Volume One of Studies in Historical and Political Science.) The volume comprises 342 pages octavo, with various diagrams and an index. It will be sold, bound in cloth, at $2.00. PHILADELPHIA, 1681-1887: A History of Municipal Development. By Edward P. Allinson, A. M., and Boies Penrose, A. B. {Extra Volume Two of Studies in Historical and Political Science.) The volume comprises 444 pages, octavo, and will be sold, bound in cloth, at $3.00; in law -sheep at $3.50. Baltimore and the Nineteenth of April, 1861. A Study of the War. By GEORGE WILLIAM BROWN, Chief Judge of the Supreme Bench of Ballimore and Mayor of the City in 1861. {Extra Volume Three of Studies in Historical and Political Science.) The volume comprises 176 pages, octavo, and will be sold, bound in cloth, at $1 . Local Constitutional History of the United States. By GEORGE E. HOWARD, Professor of History in the University of Nebraska. {Extra Volumes Four and Five of Studies in Historical and Political Science.) Volume I. — Development of the Township, Hundred, and Shire, is now ready. 542 pp. 8vo. Cloth, Price, $3.00. Volume II.— Development of the City and Local Magistracies. In prep- aration. THE NEORO EST Mi^RYLi^ND: A STUDY OF THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY. By JEFFREY R. BRACKETT, Vh. D. {Extra Volume Six of Studies in Historical and Political Science.) 270 pages, octavo, in cloth. $2.00. The extra volumes are sold at reduced rates to regular subscribers to the " Studies." NOTES SUPPLEMENTARY TO THE STUDIES. The publication of a series of Notes was begun in January, 1889. The follow- ing have thus far Ijeen issued: MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT IN ENGLAND. By Dr. Albert Shaw, of Minne- apolis, Kciiiiei on Miinicipiil (.ovcrniin'iit, .1. 11. U. SOCIAL WORK IN AUSTRALIA AND LONDON. By William Grey, of the Denison CIuIp, Ldiiiloii. ENCOURAGEMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION. By Professor Hkrhkrt B. Adams. THE PROBLEM OF CITY GOVERNMENT. By Hon. Skth Low, President of Coluiiiliiii ('ollifji'. THE LIBRARIES OF BALTIMORE. Bv Mr. P. R. Uhlkr. of the Peabody Institute. WORK AMONG THE WORKINGWOMEN IN BALTIMORE. By Professor 11. B. Adams. CHARITIES: THE RELATION OF THE STATE, THE CITY, AND THE INDI- VIDUAL TO MODERN PHILANTHROPIC WORK. By A. Ci. Warner, Ph. D., someiiiue General Secretary of the Charity Organization Society of Baltimore, now Associate Professor in the University of Nebraska. LAW AND HISTORY. By Waltku B. Si aife, LL. B., Ph.D. (Vienna), Reader on Historical Ceof^raiihy in the-Iohns Hopkins Uiiiversilv. THE NEEDS OF SELF-SUPPORTING W^OMEN. By Miss Clare de Graffen- REID, of Ihe Department of Labor, WasbiiiKton. D. (' THE ENOCH PRATT FREE LIBRARY. Bv Lewis H. Steinkr, Litt. D. EARLY PRESBYTERIANISM IN MARYLAND. Bv Rev. .1. W. McIlvain. THE EDUCATIONAL ASPECT OF THE U. S. NATIONAL MUSEUM. By Professor O. T. M.vson UNIVERSITY EXTENSION AND THE UNIVERSITY OF THE FUTURE. By R. G. MOULTON. These yide.i are sent wil/iovt charge to regular snbscrihers to the Studies. They are sold at five centt. each; Iwenty-five copies will be furnished for SI. 00. ANNUAL SERIES, 1883-1890. Eight Series of the University .Studies are now complete and will be sold, bound in cloth, as follows : SERIES I. — LOCAL INSTITUTIONS. 479 I'P. S4.00. SERIES II. — INSTITUTIONS AND ECONOMICS. ()29 pp. S4.00. SERIES III.— MARYLAND, VIRGINIA, AND WASHINGTON. .595 pp. S-1.00. SERIES IV. -MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT AND LAND TENURE. fiOOpp. $.S.50. SERIES v.— MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT, HISTORY AND POLITICS. 559 pp. 13.50. SERIES VI.— THE HISTORY OF CO-OPERATION IN THE UNITED STATES. 540 pp. $:^.5n. SERIES VII.— SOCIAL SCIENCE, MUNICIPAL AND FEDERAL GOVERN- MENT. r)2s pp. f:H5('. SERIES VIII.— HISTORY, POLITICS, AND EDUCATION. 53.50. The set of eight volumes is now offered, wiifonnly bound in cloth, for Uhriiry use, for 824.00. The eight volumes, with seven extra volumes, "New Hare))," "Baltimore," "Philadelphia," "Local Constitutional History," Vol. I, " Negro in Maryland," " U. H. Supreme Court," and " U, S. and Japan," altogether fifteen volumes in cloth, for $33.00. The seven extra volumes {now ready) will be furnished together for S10.50. All business communications should be addressed to The Johns Hop- kins Pres.s, Baltimouk, Maryland. Subscriptions will also be received, or single copies furnished by any of the following AMERICAN agents: New York.— G. P. Putnam's Sons, 27 W. 2.3d Baltimore.— John Murphy & Co. ; Gushing Si. A Co. New Haven.— E. P. Judd. Cincinnati. — Robert Clarke & Co. Boston.— Damrell & Upham ; W. B. Clarke Indianapolis.— Bowen-Merrill Co. A Co. Chicago. — A. C. McChnx A Co. Providence.— Tibbitts & Preston. Louisville.— Flexner A Staadeker. Philadelphia.— Porter & Coates; J. B. Lip- San Francisco.— Bancn^ft Company. pinoou Co. New Orleans.— George F. Wharton. Washington.— W. H. Lowderrallk & Co.; Richmond.— Randolph A English. Brentano'8. Toronto.— Carswell A Co. Montreal. — William Foster Brown & Co. EUROPEAN AGENTS: London.— Kegan Paul, Trench, Triibner & Berlin.— Puttkaiumer A Miihlbrecht: Mayer Co. ; G. P. Putnam's Sons. A Miiller. Paris.— A. Hermann, 8 rue de la Sorbonne; Leipzig.— T. A. Brockhaus. Em.Terquem,31 bisBoulevard Haussmann. Frankfort.— Joseph Baer A Co. Strasshurg.- Karl J. Triibner. Turin, Florence, and Rome. — E. Loescher. NEW EXTRA VOLUMES. Extra Volume VII^ Now Ready. The Supreme Court of the United States: Its History and Influence in Our Constitutional System. By W. W. WlIiliOUGHBY, Fellow in History, Johns Hopkins University. 124: pp. Svo. Cloth. Price, $1.25. In this work, published as the seventh extra volume of the Johns Hop- kins University Studies in History and Politics, is presented the results of an investigation into the history and development of the Supreme Court of the United States, with a critical examination of its relations with other branches of our federal and state governments. The subject is treated under the following divisions. I. The Judiciaries in the Colonies, and under the Confederation. II. The Judiciary in the Convention. III. The Judiciary in the State Convention. IV. The Establishment and Jurisdiction of the Federal Courts. V. The Supreme Court and Congress. VI. The Supreme Court and the State Legislatures and Judiciaries. VII. The Supreme Court and the Executive. VIII. The Federal Judiciary in Politics, IX. The Present Condition and Needs of the Supreme Court. X. Conclusion. Appendix: Key to Reports ; Table of Cases ; Index. Extra Volume VIII, Now Ready. Tie Mmim kMi tie MU States anl Japan. By Inazo (Ota) Nitobe, Associate Professor, Sapporo, Japan. 198 pp. Svo. Cloth. Price $1.25. This monograph is a convenient source of reference for information con- cerning the gradual development of the foreign relations of Japan. A few of the points dwelt upon are the reasons why Japan closed her ports for two centuries and a half; the means by which Perry oi)ened the country to foreign commerce; and the subsequent manner in which the United States dealt with the Island Empire. Dr. Nitobe gives a Japanese view of events and of American diplomatic methods, He describes the part our government and its citizens have taken in helping Japan to achieve the rapid changes. We see from a native standpoint the effect of the educational influences in Japan. We discover the causes which have operated to make the large commercial expectations of llie United States an unrealized dream. To tlie student of History and Politics the book is valuable, not only because of the events it narrates and the statistics it contains, but also because of the justice done the actors in our international history ; while to those who are interested in the educational and religious phases of our foreign relations, there is an impartial and clear statement of facts. Address orders to The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimoue, Md. fr-^m/^^ ^^AavaaiH^^ ^(?Aiiv«an'iv> so -< 5:> iANCElfX> •"■^■^ so V^ '<^ o ^lllBRARYOc^ -^l-UBRARYQc^ , „ , OB ^OfCAllFO% ^OfCAllFOftj^ i -< Si ^\MEUNIVERS/A ^lOSANCElfx> UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY %3AINn-3WV •^ ^ < ^OJITVDJO^ >&AHVHaiH^ >&;AHV>lfln-^'^ L 005 116 604 9 ^mmm^ ^OFCAIIFO^; >;,0F CAllFO^^j^ AWEUNIVERj'/A ,s>clOSANC[lfj> o %a3AiNn3W^ '-Aaviian# ^(?Aiivaaii# '^'iiaDNvsoi^^ "^AaaAiNnawv^ VstllBRARYQ^, ,\WMINIVER5/A OQ AvlOSANCFlfj% o ^HIBRARYQ^ ^ILIBRARYOr >i %jiivjiQ'^ ^ ! Ill I .^WE•UNIVERy/A ^lOSAVCElf/^ ^OFCAllFOfiU;, ^OFCALIF0% >■ v/ _ I S > 5 bu. ^/ia3AiNn3WV ^OFCAtlFO/?^ ^OFCAllFOffij, ^fi'Aavaan^' .^MEUNIVERS/A ^lOSANCElfj^ ^^AHvaan^ "^jjuohysoi^ "^/jaBAiNajftv' s^sNlllBRARYQr rs o AWEUNIVERi/A A>:lOSANCElfj}> o %03iiv3-3O'«^ ^ >)^OFCAIIFO% ^ AWEUNIVERi-ZA ^lOSANCEl£r> fc I CXI "T* O ec » It \ jS ^ -n <-* O O. McOF-CAUFO%. O ce s - CI =3 ^OFCAIIFO/?^