Lex Plautia de vi

Never knew a lot about this - not much more now, I guess - but I noticed it today and figured it would make for a quick little post:

The Catilinarian conspiracy, sometimes Second Catilinarian conspiracy, was an attempted coup d'état by Lucius Sergius Catilina (Catiline) to overthrow the Roman consuls of 63 BC – Marcus Tullius Cicero and Gaius Antonius Hybrida – and forcibly assume control of the state in their stead.

The conspiracy was formed after Catiline's defeat in the consular elections for 62, held in early autumn 63. He assembled a coalition of malcontents – aristocrats who had been denied political advancement by the voters, dispossessed farmers, and indebted veterans of Sulla – and planned to seize the consulship from Cicero and Antonius by force. 

In November 63, Cicero exposed the conspiracy, causing Catiline to flee from Rome and eventually to his army in Etruria. In December, Cicero uncovered nine more conspirators organising for Catiline in the city and, on advice of the senate, had them executed without trial. In early January 62 BC, Antonius defeated Catiline in battle, putting an end to the plot.

A little more about that penultimate bit in the executive summary:

December 5:

Senate debates punishment of conspirators. The majority of senators agreed with the death penalty for the currently incarcerated prisoners as well as those still to be apprehended until Caesar spoke, warning against the implications of the oligarchy taking such drastic measures against the populace. He argued against a rash decision while the senators were still full of passion and instead suggested property confiscations and life imprisonments in Roman towns. Cicero delivered the Fourth Catilinarian, followed by a rousing speech from the young Marcus Cato. The senators were then fully persuaded that a harsh sentence would dissuade Catiline from marching against Rome on the 17th.

A snip from Cicero's oratory that day:

Wherefore, O conscript fathers, attend to the safety of the republic; look round upon all the storms which are impending, unless you guard against them. It is not Tiberius Gracchus, who wished to be made a second time a tribune of the people; it is not Caius Gracchus, who endeavoured to excite the partisans of the agrarian law; it is not Lucius Saturninus, who slew Memmius, who is now in some danger, who is now brought before the tribunal of your severity. 

They are now in your hands who withstood all Rome, with the object of bringing conflagration on the whole city, massacre on all of you, and of receiving Catiline; their letters are in your possession, their seals, their handwriting, and the confession of each individual of them; the Allobroges are tampered with, the slaves are excited, Catiline is sent for; the design is actually begun to be put in execution, that all should be put to death, so that no one should be left even to mourn the name of the republic, and to lament over the downfall of so mighty a dominion. 

Finale:

Without a strong bloc of consulares to unite the senators, a consensus was very difficult to reach. When Cicero saw that Caesar had dissuaded the senators from supporting execution, he interrupted the discussion to deliver what is now his fourth Catilinarian speech, which urged immediate action.

Yet this speech by Rome's great orator apparently failed to persuade the senators, and Caesar's suggestion continued to gain support. Then it was Cato's turn as tribune-elect to speak, and he gave a powerful oration calling for the execution of the conspirators...  

Cato begins the speech by chastising the senators for taking the time to debate the punishment of the captives instead of simply punishing them, and for caring more about their wealth and possessions than about the security of their lives and freedom. He complains that they are being too soft and liberal with those who mean them harm. 

He attacks Caesar's recommendation of gentleness and mercy, complaining that it will bring the state into greater danger. He characterizes Caesar's plan as foolish and perhaps seditious, and he appeals to the senators to think of their history and tradition, and rails against the moral decline he sees in the state. 

He emphasizes the imminent destruction facing them, and says that the gods will not help them unless they help themselves. He reminds them that their national hero T. Aulus Manlius Torquatus (cos. 347 and 344 BC) executed his own excellent son for disobeying military orders even though his disobedi-ence had brought glory and advantage to his army, and he urges the senators to be no less zealous in putting to death confessed traitors who—he says—have never benefited the Republic. 

He closes with the appeal that their imminent danger required the swift and assertive execution of the conspirators. In this last part of his speech, Cato (or perhaps Sallust) exaggerates and even lies in order to push the senators into action: he claims that Catiline was at their throats, and that the captured conspirators had confessed to planning murder, arson, and other crimes. In truth, Catiline's force was far off and on the verge of being crushed by two larger state armies, and the conspirators are not recorded as having confessed as Cato asserted...

[H]e shames his audience for their departure from the ancestral customs which he represents, he presents the current debate as a dilemma between (only) two extreme positions, he avoids any discussion of compromise or a middle ground, and he employs scare tactics by presenting the state under threat of imminent destruction. These tactics succeeded in pushing the senators together into a consensus that the conspirators must be executed immediately. 

It is left as an exercise for the reader to relate all this to our current political situation.

In conclusion: the Roman Republic was a land of contrasts.