46
would he have indicted for illegality the one who proposed that decree, or would he not? If he says he would not, how can you believe him when he states that he is on the watch for those who propose illegal decrees? And if he would have brought in an indictment, is it not an outrageous thing, that when another proposed the bill, he should prevent its being finally enacted, to the end that all should not have this privilege, and should put a stop to the matter by preferring an indictment, plainly writing by its side the words of the laws;
47
and yet should now, without having won the people’s consent or made the matter public, himself continue to prefer indictments, when the laws forbid him to do so? And he will say presently that he is being abominably treated if he is not to be allowed to continue to do this, and will rehearse the penalties provided by the laws, to which he will be liable, if convicted. Is it not an outrage that he should flout the laws, but claim that there has been granted to him by you a privilege so great that no one else has dared even to ask for it?
