As the day approached, Gracchus made every effort to avoid this desperate necessity; but Octavius repelled every advance, and on the morning of the third assembly, Gracchus rose at once and moved that Octavius should be deprived of the trust which he had betrayed.
The country tribe, which obtained by lot the prerogative of voting first, was called, and its suffrage was unanimous for the deposition of Octavius; sixteen tribes followed in the same sense; the eighteenth would give a majority of the thirty-five, and its vote would determine the question. As this tribe came up to vote, Gracchus stopped the proceedings, and besought Octavius not to force on the irrevocable step. The tribune wavered; but he caught the eye of one of his rich friends, and turned coldly from Tiberius. Then the eighteenth tribe was called, and by its vote Octavius was in a moment stripped of his sacred office.[b]
“These acts of Tiberius Gracchus,” says Beesly, “are commonly said to have been the beginning of revolution at Rome; and the guilt of it is accordingly laid at his door. And there can be no doubt that he was guilty in the sense that a man is guilty who introduces a light into some chamber filled with explosive vapour, which the stupidity or malice of others has suffered to accumulate. But, after all, too much is made of this violation of constitutional forms and the sanctity of the tribunate. The first were effete, and all regular means of renovating the republic seemed to be closed to the despairing patriot, by stolid obstinacy sheltering itself under the garb of law and order. The second was no longer what it had been—the recognised refuge and defence of the poor. The rich, as Tiberius in effect argued, had found out how to use it also. If all men who set the example of forcible infringement of law are criminals, Gracchus was a criminal. But in the world’s annals he sins in good company; and when men condemn him, they should condemn Washington also. Perhaps his failure has had most to do with his condemnation. Success justifies, failure condemns, most revolutions in most men’s eyes. But if ever a revolution was excusable this was; for it was carried not by a small party for small aims, but by national acclamation, by the voices of Italians who flocked to Rome to vote. How far Gracchus saw the inevitable effects of his acts is open to dispute. But probably he saw it as clearly as any man can see the future. Because he was generous and enthusiastic, it is assumed that he was sentimental and weak, and that his policy was guided by impulse rather than reason. There seems little to sustain such a judgment other than the desire of writers to emphasise a comparison between him and his brother.”[c]
The bill itself was then passed by acclamation, and three commissioners destined to execute its provisions were elected—Tiberius himself, his father-in-law App. Claudius, his brother Caius, then a youth of twenty, serving under Scipio in Spain. The law was not deemed safe unless it was intrusted for execution to Tiberius and his kinsmen.
In a few weeks Gracchus had risen to the summit of power. He seldom stirred from home without being followed by a crowd. The Numantian War and the Servile War still lingered, and the government of the senate was not in a condition to defy attack. That body now was thoroughly alarmed, and Gracchus soon proceeded to measures which touched them in their tenderest point. Attalus Philometor, king of Pergamus, the last of the line of Eumenes, was just dead, and had bequeathed his kingdom with all his lands and treasure to the Roman people. In ordinary times the senate would at once have assumed the disposition of this bequest; but Gracchus gave notice that he would propose a bill to enact that the moneys should be distributed to those who were to receive allotments of public land, in order to assist them in purchasing stock, in erecting farm buildings, and the like; and he added that he would bring the subject of its future government before the people without allowing the senate to interfere. He thus openly announced a revolution.
When Gracchus next appeared in the senate house, he was accused of receiving a purple robe and diadem from the envoy of the late king of Pergamus. T. Annius, an old senator, who had been consul twenty years before, openly taxed the tribune with violating the constitution. Gracchus, stung to the quick by this last assault, indicted the old consular for treason against the majesty of the people. Annius appeared; but before Gracchus could speak, he said: “I suppose, if one of your brother tribunes offers to protect me, you will fly into a passion and depose him also.” Gracchus saw the effect produced, and broke up the assembly.
Moreover, many of his well-wishers had been alarmed by a law, by which he had made the triumviri absolute judges, without appeal, on disputed questions with regard to property in land. Many allotments of public land had been granted, whose titles had been lost; and every person holding under such condition saw his property at the mercy of irresponsible judges.
Gracchus felt that his popularity was shaken, and at the next assembly he thought it necessary to make a set speech to vindicate his conduct in deposing Octavius. The sum of his arguments amounts to a plea of necessity. It is true that the constitution of Rome provided no remedy against the abuse of power by an officer, except the shortness of time during which he held office and his liability to indictment at the close of that time. The tribunician authority, originally demanded to protect the people, might have turned against the people. But was it not open to Gracchus to propose a law by which the veto of a single tribune might be limited in its effect? Or might he not have waited for the election of new tribunes, and taken care that all were tried friends of his law? Instead of this he preferred a coup-d’état, and thus set an example which was sure to be turned against himself.[76]
The violent language of Nasica and his party made it plain that in the next year, when his person was no longer protected by the sanctity of the tribunician office, he would be vigorously assailed. He therefore determined to offer himself for re-election at the approaching assembly of the tribes. But his election was far from secure. Harvest-work occupied the country voters; many had grown cold; the mass of those who resided in the city were clients and dependents of the nobility. It was to regain and extend his popularity that he now brought forward three measures calculated to please all classes except the senatorial families. First, he proposed to diminish the necessary period of military service. Secondly, he announced a reform of the superior law courts, by which the juries were to be taken not from the senators only, but from all persons possessing a certain amount of property. Thirdly, he provided an appeal in all cases from the law courts to the assembly of the people.