[-26-] Titus Labienus, however, by indicting Gaius Rabirius for the murder of Saturninus caused them the greatest disorder.  For Saturninus had been killed some thirty-six years earlier, and the steps taken against him by the consuls of the period had been at the direction of the senate:  as a result of the present action the senate was likely to lose authority over its votes.  Consequently the whole system of government was stirred up.  Rabirius did not admit the murder, but denied it.  The tribunes were eager to overthrow completely the power and the reputation of the senate and were preparing for themselves in advance authority to do whatever they pleased.  For the calling to account of acts that had received the approval of the senate and had been committed so many years before tended to give immunity to those who were undertaking anything similar, and curtailed the punishments they could inflict.  Now the senate in general thought it shocking for a man of senatorial rank who was guilty of no crime and now well advanced in years to perish, and were all the more enraged because the dignity of the government was being attacked, and control of affairs was being entrusted to the vilest men.

[-27-] Hence arose turbulent exhibitions of partisanship and contentions about the court, the one party demanding that it should not be convened and the other that it should sit.  When the latter party won, because of Caesar and some others, there was strife again regarding the trial.  Caesar himself was judge with Lucius Caesar; for the charge against Rabirius was not a simple one, but the so-called perduellio-:—­and they condemned him, although they had not been chosen according to precedent by the people, but by the praetor himself, which was not permitted.  Rabirius yielded, and would certainly have been convicted before the popular court also, had not Metellus Celer who was an augur and praetor hindered it.  For since nothing else would make them heed him and they were unconcerned that the trial had been held in a manner contrary to custom, he ran up to Janiculum before they had cast any vote whatever, and pulled down the military signal, so that it was no longer lawful for them to reach a decision.

[-28-] Now this matter of the signal is about as follows.  In old times there were many enemies dwelling near the city, and the Romans (according to the account) fearing that while they were holding an assembly foes might occupy Janiculum to attack the city decided that not all should vote at once, but that some men under arms should by turns always guard that spot.  So they garrisoned it as long as the assembly lasted, but when it was about to be dissolved, the signal was pulled down and the guards departed.  Regularly no business was any longer allowed to be transacted unless the post were garrisoned.  It was permissible only in the case of assemblies which collected by companies, for these were outside the wall and all who had arms were obliged to attend them.  Even to this day it is done from religious grounds.