to an impost called vectigal.  This vectigal went into the Aerarium, which the nobles had at their disposal.  Now the law of Caius appears to have fixed a nominal price for corn to all Roman citizens, and if the market price was above this price the difference would have to be made good from the Aerarium.  We at once see the object of Caius, and how the justice of it might have blinded him to the demoralising effects of his measure.  ’The public land,’ he said in effect, ’belongs to all Romans and so does the vectigal.  If you take that to which you have no right, you shall give it back again in cheap corn.’  In short, it was a clever device for partially neutralising the long misappropriation of the State’s property by the nobles, and for giving to the people what belonged to the people—­to each man, as it were, so many ears of corn from whatever fraction would be his own share of the land. [Sidenote:  Contrast between the just proposal of Caius and the demagogy of Drusus.] When Drusus was afterwards set up to outbid Caius, he proposed that the vectigal should be remitted, and that the land that had been assigned might be sold by the occupier.  How this would catch the farmer’s fancy is as obvious as is its odious dishonesty.  It was dishonest to the State because it was only fair that each occupier should contribute to its funds, and because it did away with the hope of filling Italy with free husbandmen.  It was dishonest to the occupier himself, because it put in his way the worst temptation to unthriftiness.  When Caius renewed his brother’s laws he purposely charged the land distributed to the poor with a yearly vectigal.  How different was this from the mere demagogic trick of Drusus!  It appears, then, that the Lex Frumentaria of Caius is not the indefensible measure which modern writers, filled with modern notions, have called it.  It has, moreover, been well said that it was a kind of poor-law; and, even if bad in itself, may have been the least bad remedy for the pauperism which not Caius, but senatorial misgovernment had brought about.  No doubt it conferred popularity on Caius, and no doubt his popularity was acceptable to him; but there is no ground for believing that his noble nature deliberately stooped to demoralise the mob for selfish motives.

[Sidenote:  His Lex Judiciaria.] One great party, however, he had thus won over to his side.  The Lex Judiciaria gained over the equites also.  It has been before explained that the equites at this time were non-senatorial rich men.  Senators were forbidden by law to mix in commerce, though no doubt they evaded the law.  Between the senatorial and moneyed class there was a natural ill-will, which Caius proceeded to use and increase.  His exact procedure we do not know for certain.  According to some authorities he made the judices eligible from the equites only, instead of from the Senate.  In the epitome of Livy it is stated that 600 of the equites were to be added to the number of the senators, so