[16]
They also
urge that a case is often diverted to the consideration
of some matter irrelevant to the question, and that it is
on this matter that judgment is given. I strongly
disagree. Take the question whether all who have
spent their patrimony are to be prohibited from
addressing the people. This question must have its
point for decision, and therefore the question and the
point for decision are not different, but there are more
[p. 531]
than one question and more than one point for decision
in the case. Again, in the case of Milo,
Quintilian. With an English Translation. Harold Edgeworth Butler. Cambridge. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann, Ltd. 1920.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.