Institutio Oratoria

Sometimes again the statement of facts can be dispensed with only by one party, who is generally the plaintiff, either because it is sufficient for him to make a simple summary of his case or because it is more expedient for him to do so. It may, for instance, suffice to say,

I claim repayment of a certain sum of money which was lent on certain conditions

or

I claim a legacy in accordance with the terms of the will.

It is for the other party to explain why these sums are not due to the plaintiff.

Again it is sometimes sufficient and expedient to summarise a case in one sentence such as

I say that Horatius killed his sister.

For the judge will understand the whole charge from this simple affirmation: the sequence of events and the motive for the deed will be matters for the defence to expound.

On the other hand in some cases the accused may dispense with the statement of facts, when for instance the charge can neither be denied nor palliated, but turns solely on some point of law: the following case will illustrate my meaning. A man who has stolen from a temple money belonging to a private individual is accused of sacrilege: in such a case a confession will be more seemly than a full statement of facts:

We do not deny that the

v4-6 p.55

money was taken from the temple; but the accuser is bringing a false accusation in charging my client with sacrilege, since the money was not consecrated, but private property: it is for you to decide whether under these circumstances sacrilege has been committed.