two chapters (v and vi) that analyse the composition of the Caesarian party in the form of a long digression. No less than

and fortune the future held. None the less, the main elements in the party of Augustus and in the political system of the Pr

er for himself and his faction, transformed a faction into a national party , and a torn and distracted land into a nation, wi

c and for their last sole heir the rule of Augustus was the rule of a party , and in certain aspects his Principate was a synd

ary to investigate, not merely the origin and growth of the Caesarian party , but also the vicissitudes of the whole ruling cl

narchy again. Monarchy brought concord. 6 During the Civil Wars every party and every leader professed to be defending the ca

in Roman politics were the work of families or of a few men. A small party , zealous for reform or rather, perhaps, from host

But it was an ideal rather than a programme: there was no Ciceronian party . The Roman politician had to be the leader of a f

the tribunate, an anomalous historical survival given new life by the party of the Gracchi and converted into a means of dire

freedom and justice. On the Bellum Italicum supervened civil war. The party led by Marius, Cinna and Carbo was defeated. L. C

stic remarks about an earlier period, Hist, 1, 12 M. 2 There was no party of the populares; cf. H. Strasburger, in the arti

ted causes in Italy. The tribunes were only a pretext, but the Marian party the proscribed and the dispossessed was a permane

us 5, 24, 16). PageBook=>020 But the core and heart of Sulla’s party and Sulla’s oligarchy was the powerful house of t

iumphs in as many years. 3 Impaired by the rise and domination of the party of Marius, the Metelli got power and influence ag

ns and heirs of the dominant and interlocking groups of the governing party might assert the claims of birth and talent. Ther

nobility; 3 and his second wife, Pompeia, doubly recalled the Sullan party she was a granddaughter of Sulla. 4 Active ambiti

toral corruption, but in fact provided resources of patronage for the party in control of the government. Nor was it at all l

op his ally. He needed Caesar for counterbalance against the Catonian party until he made final choice between the two. Cato,

en Pompeius and the Optimates united their enemies and reinforced the party of Caesar. Caesar had risen to great power throug

which was a patent rebuke to his own private conduct, worked for his party by ejection of undesirable senators, and augmente

ies drove him to Caesar’s side. Ap. Pulcher was no adornment to the party of Cato. Already another leader, the consular Ahe

s of Pompeius. It was later claimed by their last survivor that the party of the Republic and camp of Pompeius embraced ten

insincerity he could recall such palpable and painful testimony. The party of the Republic was no place for a novus homo: th

absence of nearly five years, force was his only defence against the party that had attacked a proconsul who was fighting th

n or for time to bring up his armies. 2 Caesar knew how small was the party willing to provoke a war. As the artful motion of

t, some for revolution. Yet for all that, in the matter of Caesar’s party the contrast of disreputable scoundrels on the on

ent Roman knights, ‘the flower of Italy’. The composition of Caesar’s party and the character of those adherents with whom he

Roman State by the interested device of the leaders of the Caesarian party . It might appear that subsequent accounts have be

more complex. Caesar and Brutus each had right on his side. The new party of the Liberators was not homogeneous in origin o

e, cf. below, p. 85. 2 Below, p. 95. PageBook=>060 Without a party a statesman is nothing. He sometimes forgets that

of senators, it seemed clear that he had escaped from the shackles of party to supreme and personal rule. For this reason, ce

with Republicans and Pompeians to remove their leader. The Caesarian party thus split by the assassination of the Dictator n

after conquering the last of his rivals, converted the old Caesarian party into a national government in a transformed State

ment in a transformed State. The composition and vicissitudes of that party , though less dramatic in unity of theme than the

ius, from interest, from ambition, or for the Republic. The coalition party was the head and front of the nobilitas, paramoun

emark in warfare or politics ever after. As Caesar’s enemies were the party in power, being the most active and influential o

brilliant circle of orators and poets, young men hostile to whatever party was in NotesPage=>062 1 C. Antonius (cos.6

all. The most varied motives, ideals and loyalties combined in his party . Some played for gain and a place on the winning

or reinstatement. Along with bankrupts and adventurers, the Caesarian party comprised a formidable array of ability and socia

. His earliest ties were not forgotten; and his ascension revived the party of Marius and the battle-cries of the last civil

tion. 2 Hostile to the oligarchy and wishing to supersede it, Marius’ party comprised diverse elements, noble and patrician a

s and municipal aristocrats. 3 Certain distinguished families of that party had not been proscribed; and some rallied soon or

is father before him, Pompeius could not be described as a consistent party politician, for good or for evil. Caesar the proc

ng was dual in composition. The fact that he took up arms against the party in power, had been a Marian and a popularis, was

mphasis on the non-senatorial or even anti-senatorial elements in his party and in his policy. The majority of the leading co

Servilius was a man of some competence: Lepidus had influence but no party , ambition but not the will and the power for achi

tion. They had more to fear from Pompeius, and they knew it. Caesar’s party had no monopoly of the bankrupts and terrorists;

ister of finance in the kingdom. Senators and knights, such was the party of Caesar. With the Roman plebs and the legions o

169 ff. Ch. VI CAESAR’S NEW SENATORS PageBook=>078 WHEN a party seizes control of the Commonwealth it cannot take

ed power and advanced partisans to office at Rome. 1 But the Marian party had been defeated and proscribed by Sulla. The re

n cause Rome’s enemy entered the Roman Senate. 2 But the vanquished party in the Bellum Italicum and the Marian sedition wa

bonensis. They represented, not regions, but a class in society and a party in politics. But even now the work had much farth

convey the visible evidence of social and political revolution. The party of Caesar shows a fair but not alarming proportio

spect in the past. But the triumph of a military leader, reviving the party of Marius, might promise change. 2 Cicero claimed

ippa and Statilius Taurus? Along with the survivors of the Catonian party , Pompeians such as Q. Ligarius and obscure indivi

did not come in the main from the noble or patrician elements in his party : Antonius from loyalty and Lepidus from NotesPa

s personal rule. But Antonius was both a leading man in the Caesarian party and consul, head of the government. The Ides of M

he constitution was restored, would Antonius be strong enough to hold party and government together? NotesPage=>096 (N

may not have been intended as a political manifesto of the Caesarian party ; and the results may have outstripped his designs

monstration against the Liberators neither Antonius nor the Caesarian party were securely in power. The earliest contemporary

on of March 17th, that was the real calamity. 1 Both the acts and the party of Caesar survived his removal. Of necessity, giv

arms, their end would have been rapid and violent. The moderates, the party of Caesar, the veterans in Italy, and the Caesari

is ambition, which was to seize and maintain primacy in the Caesarian party . No doubt Antonius desired them to be away from R

blican, and advancing steadily. To what end? Primacy in the Caesarian party was now his: but he might have to fight to retain

o be admitted by neutrals even by Republicans. As for the Caesarian party , there were rivals here and potential adversaries

od. 3 But the youth was too astute to confine his attentions to one party . Cicero was living at Cumae at this time. He had

attered little for the power rested with the leaders of the Caesarian party . Foreseeing trouble with Antonius about the dispo

ted in his ambitions, he still hoped to avoid an open breach with the party of Brutus and Cassius. His professions, both publ

plebs and the veterans, he possessed the means to split the Caesarian party . For his first designs he needed funds and a fact

ng was won, and his power revealed, he could build up a new Caesarian party of his own. It was the aim of Octavianus to sed

ss goes far enough, a faction may grow into something like a national party . So it was to be in the end. But this was no time

d the soldiers. Not less the need for faithful friends and a coherent party . For lack of that, the great Pompeius had been fo

ith his enemies the oligarchs. Caesar had been saved because he had a party behind him. It was clear that many a man followed

s to subvert the domination of Antonius, and so destroy the Caesarian party , first Antonius, then Octavianus. But before such

th which the most blameless of Roman politicians, whatever his age or party , must expect to find himself assailed, and the tr

ancestry, Horace, Odes 1, 1, 1, &c. PageBook=>130 The best party is but a kind of conspiracy against the Commonwea

. Octavianus’ following could not raise the semblance even of being a party . It was in truth what in defamation the most admi

Caesar went to war with the government, avid and desperate men in his party terrified the holders of property. But not for lo

daughters of patricians for their brides. The men of action in the party like Salvidienus and Agrippa, the earliest of the

ory, crowding out the obscurer partisans and secret contributors. The party did not appeal to the impecunious only. Its leade

ey had, and they might achieve it to restore concord in the Caesarian party and so in the Roman State. They would gladly see

intended to employ the Caesarian adventurer to destroy the Caesarian party . Cicero claimed that he had always been consist

et he found himself, not unnaturally, on the side of Pompeius, of the party of the constitution, and of the majority of the a

what better champion than a patriot who boasted never to have been a party politician? As Antonius had once said to him, the

fter March 17th, the sharp perception that neither the policy nor the party of Caesar had been abolished brought a rapid disi

ly a domestic quarrel, it might appear, in the ranks of the Caesarian party : yet clearly of a kind to influence the public po

rn, Cicero did not know that unity had been restored in the Caesarian party . Again, in the first two speeches against Antoniu

gencies of an advocate’s practice or the fluctuations of personal and party allegiance produce startling conflicts of testimo

before: but it might be hard to resist the deceitful assertions of a party who claimed to be the champions of liberty and th

uctoritas of the Senate was naturally managed in the interests of the party in possession. Further, the discretionary power o

egality for measures of violence, to seduce the supporters of a rival party and to stampede the neutral or non-political elem

ome attention. PageBook=>155 the profession of which ideals no party can feel secure and sanguine, whatever be the act

even so, libertas could not be monopolized by the oligarchy or by any party in power. It was open to their opponents to claim

rivate army and rescued Rome and Italy from the tyranny of the Marian party ; 2 and Caesar the proconsul, trapped by Pompeius

uitably be employed to seduce the allies or adherents of the opposing party . To establish concord among citizens, the most di

the devices of fraudulent humanitarians or high-minded casuists. The party in control of the government could secure sanctio

bi senatus fuit. ’ PageBook=>161 not everything. A leader or a party might find that the constitution was being perver

hen momentous transactions were announced as though any individual or party wished to strike down that worthy and innocuous p

ariance or out of date: it is pretty clear that he had no use for any party . He knew about them all. The pessimistic and clea

nce of concerted design between the Liberators and the constitutional party in Rome on the contrary, discordance of policy an

blican state. 1 That was not the only irregularity practised by the party of the constitution when it ‘established the Repu

of an army. To give up his army and surrender at the discretion of a party that claimed to be the government, that was folly

them that they were being used by Pompeians to destroy the Caesarian party , assured them that the generals stood by him, and

tural compact between the revolutionary leader and the constitutional party crumbled and crashed to the ground. NotesPage=&

compact of interest and sentiment through which the revived Caesarian party was to establish the Dictatorship again, this tim

tle and masterly policy of using Caesar’s heir to wreck the Caesarian party . Octavianus did not intend to be removed; and the

e first time he had sought backing from senior statesmen and from the party of the constitution. Now he was consul, his only

tion of March 17th, and divided for a time the ranks of the Caesarian party . With the revival of the Pompeian faction in the

air of consuls personifying the memory of the Bellum Italicum and the party of Marius. Lepidus appears to have NotesPage=&g

ery insisted on a solid guarantee against dissension in the Caesarian party . Octavianus gave up his betrothed, the daughter o

a great number of Roman knights. 3 Their victory was the victory of a party . 4 Yet it was not their principal purpose to wipe

te individuals who owed security, if not enrichment, to the Caesarian party . NotesPage=>191 1 Suetonius, Divus Aug. 27

tticus: his wealth alone should have procured his doom. The Caesarian party was fighting the Republicans at Rome as it was so

ass-war and in the process transformed and consolidated the Caesarian party . Yet there were personal and local causes every

upported Caesar; 4 and some will have remained loyal to the Caesarian party . Certain wealthy families, such as the Aelii Lami

of his colonies were established on provincial soil, sparing Italy. A party prevailed when Caesar defeated Pompeius yet the f

equent history, and only one for long. The renegade from the Catonian party , P. Servilius, grasped the prize of intrigue and

ompeius. With Pompeius they found a refuge, with Brutus and Cassius a party and a cause, armies of Roman legions and the hope

eaving few sons; 2 there was not a single man of consular rank in the party ; its rallying point and its leaders were the youn

assassins of Caesar had no doubt left Italy at an early date; and the party was NotesPage=>198 1 Above, p. 43. 2 C.

neous Republican or Pompeian nobles, old and young. 1 The Caesarian party , though reunited after strange vicissitudes, had

o desire. Octavianus, while prosecuting the policy of the Caesarian party , was in danger of succumbing to just such an alli

. The Queen, who was able to demonstrate her loyalty to the Caesarian party , received confirmation in her possessions and dep

s Nerva was present, a friend of Antonius but acceptable to the other party . 2 Under their auspices a full settlement was r

had been the theatre of confused fighting between generals of dubious party allegiance. The compact was sealed by a matrimoni

situation in 40 B.C. PageBook=>220 leadership of the Caesarian party , should in truth have ruled over a world that had

nt: he had family influence and did not resign ambition, but lacked a party and devoted legions. His style of politics was pa

the power of his ambitious rival for the leadership of the Caesarian party . The young Caesar, strong in the support of the p

g his provinces were the most prominent and most able members of that party , the consulars Pollio, Plancus and Ventidius. Not

us and Ventidius. Not to mention Ahenobarbus, himself the leader of a party . The majority of the Republicans were now on the

ave none of that. Further, from duty to his ally and to the Caesarian party , Antonius had lost the better part of two years,

or local dynasts in foreign lands had lapsed by now to the Caesarian party . Sextus’ brother was dead, as were those faithful

nd insinuated himself into the clan of the Claudii by a marriage. His party now began to attract ambitious aristocrats, among

om certain families of the ancient aristocracy and a steadily growing party in Rome and throughout the whole of Italy. How

he Pact of Brundisium to his triumph in the Sicilian War, and the new party has acquired distinction as well as solidity. The

Spain and Africa. 1 A powerful Caesarian oligarchy grew up, while the party of Antonius, by contrast, became more and more Po

had given Antonius no son to inherit his leadership of the Caesarian party and monarchy over all the world. Of the Caesarian

of the young Caesar, winning him adherents from every class and every party . He redoubled his efforts, and Rome witnessed a c

ains, and building a new aqueduct, the Aqua Julia. 1 Meanwhile, the party grew steadily in strength. In 33 B.C. Octavianus

ar, developing and perhaps straining the balanced union between Roman party leader and Hellenistic dynast in one person; the

ned, high in office and in favour, perhaps aspiring to primacy in the party after Antonius. 3 Titius, proscribed and a pirate

But Catonians and Pompeians do not exhaust the list of nobles in the party of Antonius. The consulars L. Gellius Poplicola (

l imagines and dead consuls. Hence no little doubt whether the motley party of Antonius with a variegated past, Caesarian, Po

haracter of the War of Actium as it was designed and contrived by the party of Octavianus. It was not a war for domination ag

Perhaps he was approached by eminent ex- Republicans in the Caesarian party . 3 More than seven hundred senators fought on O

g with them the semblance of a Senate. Bitter debate ensued among the party leaders, sharpened by personal enmities and rival

bound them. 3 Antonius had presumed too much upon the loyalty of a party that was united not by principle or by a cause bu

s symptoms were soon apparent, heralding the break-up of the Antonian party . Cleopatra, however, was not the prime cause of t

tradition and the prospects of his own son, made him insist that the party of Antonius should be Roman, not regal. Not so Mu

y to hand in Antonius’ refusal to dismiss Cleopatra. But the Antonian party was already disintegrating. Loyalty would not las

ight discern a patent fraud, distrust the propaganda of the Caesarian party and refuse to believe that the true cause of the

for the Italy of his fathers and for his own dignity but not for any party , still less for the fraud that was made to appear

for any party, still less for the fraud that was made to appear above party and politics. The excesses of patriotic idealism

he had no illusions about Octavianus and his friends in the Caesarian party , old and new, about Plancus, or about Agrippa. It

ified West as well as the power and glory of Caesar and the Caesarian party . 4 The armies of the West were left in charge o

ion was desperate, heralding the end of a great career and a powerful party . Only three men of consular standing remained on

the years following by the triumphs of men prominent in the Caesarian party , the proconsuls of the western provinces :4 from

was not allowed to celebrate his triumph till July, 27 B.C. When a party has triumphed in civil war, it claims to have ass

ess of regulating the State to go, under what name were the Caesarian party and its leader to rule? He had resigned the title

f it did not accommodate itself to the wishes of the chief men in his party . For loyal service they had been heavily rewarded

ll. It could also fit a political leader—dux partium. But warfare and party politics were deemed to be over and gone. The wor

: it was simple and easily translated. Moreover, the chief men of his party were not jurists or theorists—they were diplomats

in phrases so vague and so innocuous that it could be employed by any party and adapted to any ends. The revolutionary August

ove all, he stood at the head of a large and well organized political party as the source and fount of patronage and advancem

ll aware of what was afoot. To secure the domination of the Caesarian party , the consolidation of the Revolution and the main

The choice of means did not demand deep thought or high debate in the party councils. Augustus took what he deemed necessary

s. 2 A noble, but none the less by now a firm member of the Caesarian party , was M. Junius Silanus, of a variegated past, cha

ppi. Norbanus himself was married to a great heiress in the Caesarian party , the daughter of Cornelius Balbus. 4 As for Muren

blessings of order and the semblance of freedom: the chief men of his party were there, Agrippa, Taurus and Maecenas, to prev

itself of no great moment, arose grave consequences for the Caesarian party and for the Roman State. Late in 24 B.C. or early

atus’. Worse than all that, it touched the very heart and core of the party . Fannius was a ‘bad man’ to begin with, a Republi

Since that catastrophe until recently the chief men of the Caesarian party had remained steadfastly loyal to Caesar’s heir e

in certain of the Odes of Horace. 1 The chief men of the Caesarian party had their own reasons. If Caesar’s heir perished

the reality from which it arose the fact that he was the leader of a party . At the core of a Roman political group are the

or that was the grant of Senate and People, nor the leadership of his party Agrippa and other party-magnates would have their

who was his heir in name and blood. The sentiments of the Caesarian party were soon made known. The result was a defeat for

he realm of pure monarchy; and it might end in wrecking the Caesarian party . In the secret debate which the historian Cassi

grippa is rather to be regarded as the deputy-leader of the Caesarian party . PageNote. 345 1 Suetonius, Caligula 23: ‘Uli

hy in the full and flagrant sense of those terms. But the Caesarian party had thwarted its leader in the matter of Marcellu

ed harmony or theory of politics, but by the history of the Caesarian party and by the demands of imperial government. It was

, by stripping Antonius, it not merely swallowed up the old Caesarian party but secured the adhesion of a large number of Rep

n of a large number of Republicans and could masquerade as a national party . Over seven hundred senators accompanied Italy’s

the ostensible contrast between Dictator and Princeps. The Caesarian party was installed in power: it remained to secure dom

enacious, more tightly organized. Capital felt secure. A conservative party may be very large and quite heterogeneous. Cicero

tatus and function in the comprehensive, traditional and conservative party that had superseded the spurious Republic of the

s it for reasons of theory that Caesar and Augustus attached to their party and promoted to the Senate the aristocracy of Ita

who had won the War of Actium. In the crisis of 23 B.C. the Caesarian party thwarted the monarchical designs of Augustus and

ction for the aristocracy. Like Caesar’s faction, the new Caesarian party comprised diverse elements, the most ancient patr

sidy. Loyalty and service to the patron and leader of the Caesarian party continued to be the certain avenue of advancement

etailed treatment. Noble or upstart, the chief men of the Caesarian party attained to the consulate and dispensed patronage

ork was dedicated to the grandson of his patron. 4 The governmental party represented a kind of consensus Italiae. Municipa

ucted by Tiberius. Then in 6 B.C. came a crisis in the family and the party of Augustus. Tiberius retired, bitter and contuma

cum and on the Rhine, a more searching trial for the Princeps and his party when Drusus was dead and Tiberius in exile. Whate

rtain number of prominent and representative figures in the Caesarian party and certain members of the reigning family were p

morosely to Rhodes. A crisis had supervened, at the very core of the party . Another followed before long, and Augustus loudl

ION PageBook=>419 THREE dangers ever beset the domination of a party there may arise dissension among its directors, t

n his eleventh year. The Princeps had broken loose from the Caesarian party , alienated his deputy and a section at least of h

shock of Tiberius’ departure. 1 Not at all: both the Princeps and his party were strong enough to stand the strain. Though a

pse. Depressed and decimated by war and revolution, swept up into one party and harnessed as they had been to the service of

ad passed beyond the measure and proportions of a Roman politician or party leader. He had assumed the stature of a monarch a

at Silvanus was popular with Tiberius. Lacking Tiberius, the Claudian party lacked a leader of standing in war and politics.

ls of these years. Messalla still lived on; and he had something of a party . 1 The Scipiones were all but extinct; 2 but the

f letters, good sense and the firm avoidance of desperate ambition or party spirit. Piso’s family became related to the Crass

revulsion of fortune. 3 But the principal supporters of the Claudian party were probably the remnant of the Pompeians. In

uch exciting speculations had passed ten years before. The government party among the aristocracy old and new, built up with

he daughter of Marcella. Varus had other useful connexions. 4 A new party becomes discernible, dual in composition, as migh

new, provide some indication of the range and character of Tiberius’ party . Members of families that hitherto had not risen

is evident that Augustus had taken counsel with the chief men of his party , making his dispositions for the smooth transfere

ere lightly dissolved according to the interest or the whim of either party . Few indeed of the great ladies would have been a

me: Philippi, Perusia and even Actium were victories of the Caesarian party over the nobiles. Being recruited in so large a m

ceps was merely a docile instrument in the hands of an uncompromising party of puritan nationalists. Augustus himself came of

nt with a large class in Italy Augustus owed much of his success as a party leader and sufficient confidence to persist in th

be a misguided man of the people or a vindictive noble a split in the party itself and dissension between its leaders. The cr

a depression of the nobiles. They were now confronted by an organized party and an organized system of government. PageNote

e Republic, Cn. Domitius stood next to Antonius for leadership in his party . To the Domitii, primacy might be delayed, but

Ann. 4, 32. Ch. XXXIII PAX ET PRINCEPS PageBook=>509 WHEN a party has triumphed in violence and seized control of t

onal Roman prejudice, sharpened under the domination of the Caesarian party and debarred from attacking the head of the gover

l patriotism. With the Principate, it was not merely Augustus and his party that prevailed it meant the victory of the non-po

but not for political wisdom. 3 Neither Tacitus nor Trajan had been a party to this folly; the brief unhappy Principate of Ne

triumph of all. Had he died in the early years of the Principate, his party would have survived, led by Agrippa, or by a grou

rlier partisans; the nobiles returned to prominence and the Caesarian party itself was transformed and transcended. A governm

domination of a faction’. Dux had become Princeps and had converted a party into a government. For power he had sacrificed ev

ff., 119 f.; his first march on Rome, 125 ff., 141 f.; origin of his party , 127 ff.,201, 234 ff., 349 ff.; political funds,

f., 370, 404 f.; in relation to the Roman Commonwealth, 520 ff.; as a party leader, 288, 322 f., 340, 349 ff., 419 ff., 473 f

os. 88 B.C.), 7, 9, 16 f., 47, 51 f., 53, 65, 287, 306, 442, 490; his party , 18 if.; marries a Metella, 20, 31; war against M

06, 210, 212, 213, 216, 225, 227, 230, 241, 264, 405; as a Republican party leader, 268, 281, 495; in 32 B.C., 276, 278, 281;

. Gods, descent from, 68, 83, 100, 360. Gracchi, activity of, 16; party of, 60; and agriculture, 450 f. see also Semproni

s and adherents, 41, 51, 59, 61 ff., 94 f.; relations with the Marian party , 65, 89, 94; partisans among the Italici, 91 ff.;

Rufrena, 202. Lex Saenia, 306. Lex Titia, 190, 225. Liberators, party of, 59 f., 95, 198 f., 205 f.; on and after the I

vius Drusus, M. (tr. pl. 91 B.C.), 16, 19, 20, 87, 89, 229, 345; as a party leader, 87, 285; and Italy, 87, 285 f.; oath swor

Marius, C. (cos. 107 B.C.), 9, 16, 86, 441, 515; his policy, 86, 94; party , 19, 65, 86, 93 f.; in relation to Italians, 86 f

ls, 15, 56 f., 70, 121 f., 146, 151, 157 f., 420, 504, 506 f.; in the party of Marius, 19, 65; restored to power by Sulla, 17

tude towards Pompeius, 30 f., 43 ff., 198; towards Caesar, 59; in the party of Caesar, 61 ff., 94; in the proscriptions, 192,

omoted by Marius, 86, 94; allies of Pompeius, 31 f.; in the Caesarian party , 80 ff.; in the Triumviral period, 199 ff., 243 f

as a leader of the Optimates, 26, 146; his connexions, 21, 23 f.; his party , 44 f., 268, 492; condones bribery, 34, 100; hate