In 52 BC Cassius was one of the prosecutors of M. Saufeius under the Lex Pompeia de vi in connection with the death of P. Clodius Pulcher (137); the defendant was successfully
F 1A Asc. in Cic. Mil. 95 (pp.48 KS = 54.22–55.4 C.)
= 162 F 31.
169 Q. PILIUS CELERAgainst M. Servilius (F1–2)
In autumn 51 BC Pilius prosecuted M. Servilius (RE Servilius 20) on a charge of extortion in a complex and protracted case (TLRR 338); a written version of the speech seems to have existed shortly afterward (F2).
The background to the case: C. Claudius Pulcher, provincial governor in Asia (55–53 BC), was charged with extortion upon his return in 53 BC (TLRR 336). He bribed M. Servilius, but was found guilty nevertheless. Apparently, the people in the province were unhappy with the money recovered: in 51 BC Pausanias attempted to prosecute Servilius (who was to be defended by M. Caelius Rufus ) under the charge “quo ea pecunia pervene-
supported by M. Caelius Rufus (162 F31) and Cicero (Cic. Pro M. Saufeio: Crawford 1984, 219–21) (TLRR 313).
F 1A Asconius on Cicero, Pro Milone
= 162 F 31.
169 Q. PILIUS CELER
Q. Pilius Celer (RE Pilius 2) is often mentioned in Cicero’s letters (esp. Cic. Att. 10.1.4; Ad Brut. 2.5.3–4). He fought for C. Iulius Caesar (121) in Gaul and was on his side in the civil war.Against M. Servilius (F 1–2)
rit” (cf. Cic. Rab. post. 9) since he probably assumed that Servilius had received the money; his application for prosecution was not accepted by the praetor M. Iuventius Laterensis (167) (TLRR 337). Thereupon, Pilius proceeded toprosecute Servilius for extortion, when Ap. Claudius Pulcher (son of C. Claudius Pulcher) intervened; he asserted that Servilius had received a bribe of three million sesterces from his father. As a result of a procedural error of Laterensis, Servilius was neither acquitted nor convicted. Yet, Ap. Claudius Pulcher did not pursue the matter further; thus, Pilius was able to go ahead with the prosecution.