Closely akin to this was the quasi-jurisdiction of
the censors, which likewise sprang up at this period.
They were invested with authority to adjust the Roman
budget and the burgess-roll, and they availed themselves
of it, partly to impose of their own accord taxes
on luxury which differed only in form from penalties
on it, partly to abridge or withdraw the political
privileges of the burgess who was reported to have
been guilty of any infamous action.(3) The extent
to which this surveillance was already carried is
shown by the fact that penalties of this nature were
inflicted for the negligent cultivation of a man’s
own land, and that such a man as Publius Cornelius
Rufinus (consul in 464, 477) was struck off the list
of senators by the censors of 479, because he possessed
silver plate to the value of 3360 sesterces (34 pounds).
No doubt, according to the rule generally applicable
to the edicts of magistrates,(4) the sentences of
the censors had legal force only during their censorship,
that is on an average for the next five years, and
might be renewed or not by the next censors at pleasure.
Nevertheless this censorial prerogative was of so immense
importance, that in virtue of it the censorship, originally
a subordinate magistracy, became in rank and consideration
the first of all.(5) The government of the senate
rested essentially on this twofold police control
supreme and subordinate, vested in the community and
its officials, and furnished with powers as extensive
as they were arbitrary. Like every such arbitrary
government, it was productive of much good and much
evil, and we do not mean to combat the view of those
who hold that the evil preponderated. But we
must not forget that—amidst the morality
external certainly but stern and energetic, and the
powerful enkindling of public spirit, that were the
genuine characteristics of this period—these
institutions remained exempt as yet from any really
base misuse; and if they were the chief instruments
in repressing individual freedom, they were also the
means by which the public spirit and the good old
manners and order of the Roman community were with
might and main upheld.
Modifications in the Laws
Along with these changes a humanizing and modernizing
tendency showed itself slowly, but yet clearly enough,
in the development of Roman law. Most of the
enactmerits of the Twelve Tables, which coincide with
the laws of Solon and therefore may with reason be
considered as in substance innovations, bear this
character; such as the securing the right of free
association and the autonomy of the societies that
originated under it; the enactment that forbade the
ploughing up of boundary-balks; and the mitigation
of the punishment of theft, so that a thief not caught
in the act might henceforth release himself from the
plaintiff’s suit by payment of double compensation.
The law of debt was modified in a similar sense,
but not till upwards of a century afterwards, by the