# CHAPTER 8 — False Accusations Are As Harmful to Republics As Public Indictments Are Useful

Notwithstanding the fact that the ability of Furius Camillus, after he had freed Rome from the oppression of the Gauls, made all of the Roman citizens defer to him without causing them to feel that they had lost reputation or rank, Manlius Capitolinus could not, all the same, endure the fact that so much honour and glory was attributed to him, since it seemed to him that in so far as the salvation of Rome was concerned, he deserved as much deference as Camillus for having saved the Capitol, and that in so far as praiseworthy feats of military valour were concerned, he was not inferior to him. * Thus, so full of envy that he could not restrain himself on account of the other’s glory, and realizing that he could not sow discord among the senators, he turned to the plebeians, spreading various sinister rumours among them. Among the other things he said was that the treasure collected to give to the Gauls, but which was then not given to them, had been usurped by private citizens, and that if it could be recovered it could be converted to the public benefit, by relieving the plebeians either of their taxes or of some private debt. These words were quite persuasive with the plebeians, with the result that they began to hold meetings and, as they wished, to create a number of disturbances in the city; this displeased the senate, and since they considered it a significant and dangerous situation, they created a dictator * to examine the matter and to hold Manlius’ impetuosity in check. As a result, the dictator quickly summoned Manlius and brought him before the public, the one man confronting the other, the dictator amidst the nobles and Manlius amidst the plebeians. Manlius was told he must reveal who held this treasure about which he spoke, because the senate was as anxious to hear about it as the plebeians; Manlius did not respond to this in detail but evaded the issue, saying that it was not necessary to tell them something they already knew, so that the dictator had him put in prison.

It is to be noted from this text how detestable false accusations are in free cities, as well as in any other form of civil society, and how, in order to repress them, one must not ignore any institution which might do so. Nor is there a better method for eliminating them than to provide many open avenues for indictments, because public indictments bring as many benefits to republics as false accusations bring them harm, and there is this difference between them, that false accusations need neither witnesses nor any other particular corroboration to prove them, so that anyone can be slandered by anyone else, but not everyone can be publicly indicted, since indictments require true corroboration and circumstances which demonstrate the truth of the charges. Men are publicly indicted before the magistrates, the people, and the councils; they are falsely accused in the public squares and under the porticoes. False accusations are most often employed where there are fewer public indictments and wherever cities are less well organized to receive them. Nevertheless, the organizer of a republic must find an arrangement which allows charges to be made against any citizen in the republic without fear and without respect to the individual’s position, and after a charge has been made and thoroughly examined, he must severely punish those making false accusations, who cannot complain when they are punished, since the avenues were open to hear the charges against those whom they falsely chose to accuse under the porticoes. Wherever this element is not well organized, great disorders always follow, because false accusations irritate but do not punish the citizens, and those who are irritated think about proving their worth by hating rather than fearing the things that are said against them.

This element, as was mentioned, was well organized in Rome, and it has always been poorly organized in our city of Florence. And just as in Rome this institution did much good, so in Florence the lack of such an institution caused much harm. Anyone reading the histories of this latter city will see how many false accusations were lodged in every era against citizens who were actively involved in the city’s most important affairs. Of one they said that he had robbed funds from the city government; of another, that he had not succeeded in some undertaking because he was bribed; and of yet another, that because of his ambition, he had committed this or that impropriety. As a consequence of this hatred arose on every side, which led to deep disagreements, from deep disagreements to sects, and from sects to ruin. * If in Florence there had been an institution for making public indictments against citizens and for punishing those who made false accusations, the endless disorders that resulted would not have come about: those citizens, both the condemned and the acquitted, would not have been able to harm the city, and there would have been fewer men publicly indicted than falsely accused, since, as I have stated, it is not as easy to make public indictments as to make false accusations. Among the other means a citizen has employed to prove his worth and become great, there have been these false accusations; used against powerful citizens opposed to his appetite for power, these methods are very effective, because by taking the side of the people and confirming their low opinion of his opponents, he can make the people his friend. Although one could cite many examples of this, I shall be satisfied to cite only one. The Florentine army was in the field at Lucca under the command of Messer Giovanni Guicciardini, its commissioner. * Whether because of his bad leadership or his bad fortune, the destruction of that city did not come about. Still, whatever the case may have been, Messer Giovanni was blamed for it, since it was said that he had been bribed by the people of Lucca; this false accusation was supported by his enemies and almost drove Messer Giovanni to complete despair. Although in order to vindicate himself he wished to be placed into the hands of the Captain [of the People], * none the less he could never clear himself, since no means of doing so existed in that republic. As a result, great indignation arose among Messer Giovanni’s friends, who were for the most part powerful men, and among them some who wished to make changes in Florence. * Both as a result of this affair and for other reasons, the problem grew to such an extent that it brought about the ruin of that republic. *

Manlius Capitolinus was, therefore, a false accuser and not a lawful one, and in this case the Romans demonstrated exactly how false accusers must be punished. Indeed, they must be turned into public accusers, and when the public indictment is found true, either reward them or avoid punishing them, but when it is found false, punish them as Manlius was punished.