Senatvs Consvlta

Senate Voting Results

5 December MMDCCLIII

as published by tribune Lucius Sergius Australicus

Savete quirites!

COMPLETE Results of Voting on the November Senate Agenda

Proxies for A. Gryllus Graecus and M. Iunius were cast by L. Cornelius 
Sulla
Proxies for M. Iucundia Flavia were cast by Q. Fabius Maximus

Item the First.  
Reimbursement procedure for Magistrates of Nova Roma
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: No
A. Gryllus Graecis: No
M. Iunius: No
C. Aelius Ericius: No.
M. Cassius Julianus: NO. * The proposed procedure is an excellent start, 
but was done in a hurry since there was a "crisis" over Censorial 
funding. That has been dealt with in the short term, so there seems to be 
time for everyone who has ideas to present them. This can be worked out 
and completed next vote. 
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas (yes).
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS. We have to start somewhere on 
this, and most of the proposal is perfectly sensible
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)! (I agree with my Colleague Senator 
Germanicus that, in my view, to pass a flawed Consultum is far worse than 
to wait for a reasonable time to get it right.  There is a saying which 
applies: "We never have the luxury to get it right the first  time, but 
always have sufficent resource to correct it!!!" )
C. Tullius Cicero: Negat, this has not been sufficiently discussed.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO  Good in principle, but I cannot 
support it as it stands. It needs much more careful, unhurried work, 
especially on detailed procedure for claiming, assessing claims, 
reimbursement, and  audit. I strongly suggest we co-opt a committee, from 
citizens with professional experience, and including the Quaestores, for 
encoding such procedures as proposed law. Project funding - in fact, the 
whole issue of project management - needs a whole manual, not just part 
of one Senatus Consultum.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Negat.  This procedure was rewritten twice from varius 
submissions.  It still needs some tweaking.  Suggest it is polished and 
resubmitted for Dec. Call.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS  I agree with Cassia.  We have to start 
somewhere.  If we keep changing the text, it will never get done.
M. Marcius Rex: NEGAT  More time for discussion needed
T. Labienus Fortunatus: NEGAT There is much of value in this proposal, 
but the quaestores' role is incorrect.
D. Iunius Palladius: Iunius Palladius votes no
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Antiquo (Negat/NO)
M. Octavius Germanicus: NEGAT.  While a procedure is needed, this one has 
the Quaestors choosing whether to approve an expense, which is not proper.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: NEGAT  There seem to be both structural and 
grammatical errors with this proposal.
YES 3; NO  15; AB 0  
ITEM 1 FAILS

Item the Second   
It is proposed that Nova Roma enact the following policy on financial 
controls
Shall this be done?  
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS. Same points apply
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, there should be a permanent treasury staff.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO  For reasons similar to those stated 
above, I cannot give this my approval.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: Negat  More time for discussion needed
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius abstains. I think that we should start 
moving control of the
treasury towards a more permanent, professional staff.
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 15; NO 2;  AB 1;  
ITEM 2 PASSES

Item the Third
Legio V Alaudae (The Larks) request Nova Roma Sponsorship  
Shall we sponsor the Legio?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES. * I also am not overly concerned over having 
too many small legions. Sponsoring new startups only gives us an 
opportunity to grow Legions which are more connected to Nova Roma, and 
made up with a greater percentage of Citizens. 
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. (While some have expressed concerns about 
sponsoring too many small legions, I think this is exactly the purpose of 
our sponsorship program - to give these legions a place to find one 
another and arrange projects in cooperation.)
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, this is part of our goals.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  Though I feel we should not go on to 
sponsor an infinity of legiones, as I said earlier, I wish them well.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas.  Although we should start thinking of 
requesting greater numbers of recruits in legiones before we grant them 
sponsorship.  Alaudae has a special place in my heart, since it was one 
of the first legiones I constructed.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS  I had originally suggested the 
sponsorship program way back when, and am quite pleased that it is being 
continued.
YES 18;  NO 0; AB 0;  
ITEM 3 PASSES

Item the Fourth. 
Incorporation of Switzerland into Province Germania.
Shall we do this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes. * If there is later any objection from Italian, 
French or Romany Swiss, we can adjust borders and/or name at that time.  
I assume it will be considered the Regio of Helvitia.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas, though I wish we had been able to hear from 
more actual 
Helvetian Citizens before making this choice.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: ABSTINEO.
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, I don't see the combination as a problem.
N. Moravius Vado: ABSTINEO/NO VOTE/ABSTAIN  Although no French- or 
Italian-speaking citizens have objected (I admit I do not know whether 
there are any to object), there may be objections in future. Also, as 
there is no one in this House to speak for the particular interests of 
the cives of Gallia or Italia, I feel unable to support this motion. And 
could we give the regio a more Roman name, like Helvetia, please?
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas  This will set the record straight.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS  Though what about all the French speaking 
citizens?  When I was there I thought they made up a third of the 
population.  Do they really want to be part of Germania?
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS 
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.  Yes, but if a French or 
Italian-speaking citizen of Helvetia prefers to be considered part of 
Gallia or Italia, I hope the censors would allow that.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS  We are merely formally confirming 
the status quo.
YES 16; NO O; AB 2;  
ITEM 4 PASSES

Item the Fifth,
Certification of the Sodalitus Musarum as a Nova Roman Sodalitus.
Shall we do this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. May the Gods inspire them.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  This Sodalis will, divis volentibus, 
enrich our cultural Romanitas and especially the Religio Romana.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;  
ITEM 5 PASSES

Item the Sixth 
Quintus Sertorius has asked to be considered for appointment as
Propraetor of Canada Occidentalis.
Shall he be appointed?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes. * [Much cheering, fanfares and flower petals!]
M. Cassius Julianus: At last! I vote an enthusiastic YES, and am 
gratified that his patience held out long enough to see this done. 
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. He has shown himself to be enthusiastic, 
dedicated and energetic on behalf of Nova Roma.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, Sertorious is perfect for the position.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  He is a man of proven diligence, 
enthusiasm, diligence and ability.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.  He has worked hard for this, and will 
make an excellent praetor.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; N0 0; AB 0;  
ITEM 6 PASSES

Item the Seventh
The Praetor of Germania has requested that Senate might approve the 
opening 
of the Limes Cooperation between the Provinces.   
Shall we approve this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES. (And am in agreement that we should be 
more proactive and work toward starting such efforts ourselves.) 
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Abstaino. I am not clear on this issue.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  The sharing and emulation of best 
practice, and mutual assistance, deserves approval. The Limes 
Co-operation facilitates this. I speak from experience. 
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.  Standards are a good thing.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 17; NO 0; AB 1;  
ITEM 7 PASSES 

Item the Eighth.
Additional Internal Senate Procedures.
A. The Senate shall conduct its business within full view of the 
 Citizenry. This will be implemented by allowing all Citizens to read 
 (but not post on) the Senate e-mail list.  Exceptions are provided.
Shall we allow this?
L. Cornelius Sulla: No
A. Gryllus Graecis: No
M. Iunius: No
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: NO
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. It is my understanding that in ancient Rome, 
Senate discussions could be heard by (and were regularly discussed by) 
Citizens while they were going on. It is also consistent with the idea of 
helping Citizens of Nova Roma to feel more involved and to 
contribute their knowledge and ideas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: NEGAT. I am persuaded by the arguments of 
Australicus on this point.
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)!  (I do not believe, in my view, that any 
useful information can be gained by the Citizens of Nova Roma from 
hearing deliberations on the Senate Floor, and I am likewise absolutely 
certain that much harm and confusion would result from such a proposal.  
Finally it does not appear to be historically correct.  I honor Senator 
Fortunatus for his abiliy to look past the immediate discussion, and 
pledge to him my support in the future toward keeping the Citizens of 
Nova Roma properly informed.)
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, I am satisfied with the restrictions.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO  As I have said before, if it proves 
unworkable, it will be hard to revoke or amend. I would, however, support 
any future proposal to allow individual citizens read-only access on 
application (especially magistrates and other officials), for a limited 
period and to a limited number at any time.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Negat.  I have already made my reasons known.  If the 
Republic didn't do it, why should we?  The Senators conducted business 
out doors, until they had to debate topics.  Then they went inside.  
There had to be a reason for this.  I think I was so they wouldn't be 
intimidated by the populace.
M. Iucundia Flavia: NEGAT  It was not done in old Rome.  We are 
attempting to recreate the Roman republic.
M. Marcius Rex: Negat  I bow to Sergius Australicus for his 
constitutional law opinion on this particular proposal.
T. Labienus Fortunatus: NEGAT  I have, no doubt, surprised many with this 
vote.  I came into this debate much in favor of the idea, though I had 
some slight qualms about the technicalities of its execution.  I remain 
torn between a desire to provide a transparent government and a wish to 
maintain the mos maiorum.  I have long argued that one of the major 
questions facing Nova Roma is how much to keep of the old versus how much 
to add of the new. It is not a question that will be answered quickly or 
easily.
Additionally, the major reason that I originally felt that this body's 
deliberations should be open to the populace is because of the tendency 
to use senatus consulta to decide issues that should be taken before the 
comitia.  Often, we treat our decisions as though they create law, and we 
have occasionally acted as though we have a right to discipline 
individual citizens--effectively acting as a closed court in which the 
accused is not even assured of being allowed to defend him or her self. 
If we take onto ourselves the powers of the comitia, then we must be 
exposed to scrutiny and answerable to the people for our decisions.
However, I am heartened by the fact that almost every candidate for major 
office has made building the institutions necessary to rectify the 
problem of the Senate's arrogation of powers that are not its by right 
the center of his or her campaign.  Therefore, in light of those campaing 
promises, and in an optimistic spirit, I opt to maintain the mos maiorum.
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes no
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Antiquo (Negat/NO)
M. Octavius Germanicus: NEGAT.  I refer once again to the line from Twain 
(or Bismarck) about sausage-making.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: NEGAT  I am guessing, based on on the votes of 
some of my colleagues, that we are to vote individually for each half of 
this item. If I am mistaken in this
assumption, then my vote for the combined 8th item is NEGAT. (May I 
suggest that in the future such items be split into two for clarity's 
sake?)
YES 3; NEGAT 15; AB 0;  
ITEM 8A FAILS 

B. II. The votes of individual Senators, along with any rationales they 
offer with their votes (i.e., in the same e-mail as the vote itself), 
will be made available to the Citizens by the Tribunes of the Plebs, 
either by forwarding them to the main Nova Roma e-mail list or by 
posting them to the Nova Roma web site.
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES, and suggest that there should be a 
record of Senate votes posted to the website. No Senator should be 
*forced* to explain their vote, but an option for such should definitely 
be included. 
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS.
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  This House as an institution, and many 
of its members as individuals, have suffered from an undeservedly 
negative perception by the populus. I trust this will go a long way to 
remedying the matter.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas. This has always been allowed.  Lists were 
often put up on the sides of the Rosta so those that could read could 
inspect them.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.  Although the process itself should be 
conducted in privacy, the people do have a right to know who supports 
which items.  Even though we are appointed for life, many of us run for 
elected office as well, and should therefore be held accountable.
I also believe this to be historically correct, as the Tribunes (and 
door-slaves) did inform the people what happened within the Curia.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS  As long as this doesn't turn into 
the "thin edge of the wedge", I don't see any harm in it. I haven't been 
able to find anything that speaks of Senate votes being a secret ballot.
YES 17; NO 1; AB 0;  
ITEM 8B PASSES

Item the Ninth.
Change to the Electoral Procedure Re: Multiple Candidates
To ensure a consistent standard for future elections, these two mutually 
exclusive proposals are now placed before the Senate: 
 VOTE FOR BOTH or ABSTAIN.  
     A. "One Vote"
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: No.
M. Cassius Julianus: A. One vote.  Octavius has made an excellent case 
for this.
Patricia Cassia: A. One vote. I am persuaded by Octavius' arguments on 
behalf of historical accuracy.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS. I am persuaded here by the 
argument for consistency with Roma Antiqua and by the immediate 
practicalities. I do think, however, that it is unfortunate that we have 
attempted to have a full number of Centuries with a small number of 
citizens. This rather destroys the point of the Century system, 
irrespective of the silly results of treating a century as "tied" when 
one citizen votes. 
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Negat. If there is more than one selection there must 
be more than one vote to reflect the opinion of the citizen.
N. Moravius Vado: NEGAT/ANTIQUO/NO  People have a right to vote for as 
many candidacies as there are posts to be filled. Votes will be spoiled 
as a result of misunderstandings. This will be contentious. Ancient 
practice is not always best practice.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas.  We do have to come up with a better system 
eventually.
M. Iucundia Flavia: NEGAT  This is not a full vote.  It is half a vote.  
Why should the citizens stand for that?
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes **NO** on this item, which should 
more properly be
called the "half a vote per voter proposal."
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.  This fixes a flaw in our system in a 
historically correct way. Each person selects *one* candidate for consul 
or praetor, just as our ancestors did.  A beneficial effect of this is 
that both competing viewpoints will be represented in the Consulate, and 
the consuls will serve as controls on each others power -- as the 
founders of the Republic intended.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS  My arguments in favor of this 
option have already been presented.
YES 13; NO 5; AB 0;  
ITEM 9A PASSES

     B.  "Multiple Votes, Ties Awarded to All"
L. Cornelius Sulla: No
A. Gryllus Graecis: No
M. Iunius: No
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: NEGAT, for the reasons above
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, as above.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  It has been said that this system would 
favour political parties. There are no political parties in NR. May the 
gods spare us that!  It has been said that this system gives people more 
than one vote for each candidate. Mea sententia, it is better to give the 
voters more votes than they ought to have, rather than deny them the 
votes they ought to have.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Negat.  Too many potental problems though I liked the 
effort.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS  What problems?  People get to vote for who 
they want.  Isn't this what it is all about?
M. Marcius Rex: NEGAT
T. Labienus Fortunatus: NEGAT  A very good try, M Octavius.
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes YES
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Absto (abstain)
M. Octavius Germanicus: NEGAT.  It seemed like a good idea at first, 
mathematically and logically sound, but it is not historically correct, 
it also encourages factionalism by allowing an entire "party" to be voted 
in, and it changes the balance of power by allowing some votes to be 
counted twice.
YES 5; NO 10; AB 3; 
ITEM 9B FAILS
  
Item the tenth
Addition of a Third Rogator.
To include a third elected or appointed Rogator, with only two needed to 
oversee the electoral process. 
The third to act as backup
Shall this be done?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes*My comments on this proposal is that it should 
be taking to the Comitia and the Lex Vedia amended.  Otherwise according 
to the Legal precedence
section in the Constitution, this Senatus Consulta means very little.
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius says: It would help the Republic to function if we 
had a couple
of spares for this highly essential post. We should so recommend this to 
the Comitia.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES. I also agree with Germanicus that there 
should actually be *four* trained Rogators at any time as opposed to 
three. 
Patricia Cassia: Assuming this is actually a recommendation to the 
Comitia rather than an attempt to overturn a Lex (which we can't do), Uti 
rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS - provided that this is to be 
understood as a recommendation for legislation, not as an 
unconstitutional attempt to amend a lex by s.c.
M. Minucius Audens: NO (Negat)!  (The item is not worded properly to be 
voted upon by this August Body. A change in the proper Lex should be 
submitted for approval and then voted upon by the people.  Again, in my 
view, a flawed Consultum is worse than no decision at all.)
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES
If the Senate is entitled to co-opt a Dictator in an emergency, it would 
seem absurd for the Senate not to take ythe initiative to co-opt back-up 
Rogatores (I would favour two), when the machinery of government is in 
danger of breaking down. Consul Q. Fabius has every right to feel 
exasperated. So do I. A  general agreement to bend the rules of the 
Constitution in cases such as those we have experienced this year, when 
the Comitia cannot work and elections cannot be held is, I believe, fully 
pardonable when a shortcoming in the Constitution has us backed into a 
Catch-22 situation. 
It is the spirit of the law, not the letter of it, which is important at 
times like these. So I am voting for something that is unconstitutional 
and therefore (technically) illegal. I hope it is the last time I shall 
feel I need to do such a thing. I hope this passes the vote, and goes to 
the Comitia for ratification (assuming we have enough Rogatores to allow 
this to happen).
Q. Fabius Maximus: I say yes it should be done and sent to the Comitia 
for ratification.
The Consules will write a lex and put it to the people next week.
M. Iucundia Flavia: NEGAT  It is unconstitutional as written.
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS  I concur with Senator Labienus on this issue
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS  I agree to this only inasmuch as we 
shall secure a replacement for either of the two elected rogatores in 
anticipation of the eventuality that one of them may prematurely lay down 
the task.  We do not have the power to alter a lex, and I urge the 
consules to draft an appropriate lex and put it before the people during 
the upcoming election.
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes NO
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Antiquo (Negat/No) As Germanicus pointed out this 
is not something we can do, but I do think this should be something that 
is on the first comtia call.
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.  I am aware that the lex specifies two 
Rogators; therefore the third must be strictly considered a backup, who 
will assume the position when one of the primaries fails to fulfill their 
duty.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: NEGAT  The Senate lacks the legal authority to 
alter a Lex. The item, as presented, is unconstitutional in my opinion. 
If it does pass, I would urge the Tribunes to exercise their power of 
intercessio in such cases. (I would absolutely support a Senatus 
Consultum that urges the Lex be amended by the Assembly...)
YES 13; NO 5; AB 0;  
ITEM 10 PASSES LEX TO BE SENT TO THE COMITIA

Item the eleventh
Pompeia Cornelia Strabo requests to be Propraetor of Canada Orientalis. 
Shall we allow her?
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES. Pompeia Cornelia Strabo has proven 
herself to be both dedicated and enthusiastic. I believe Nova Roma will 
benefit greatly by having her in this office. 
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas. Pompeia Cornelia is a thoughtful and mature 
person who will represent us well.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas, Cornelia is well suited to the position. I 
am pleased to see both Canadian positions will be filled for the first 
time.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  She is as worthy of the office as Q. 
Sertorius is of that of Propraetor Canadae Occidentalis, for the same 
reasons.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Vti Rogas.  Though is it my imagination or are most of 
the Cornelii 
Provincial Praetors?
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;  
ITEM 11 PASSES

Item the Twelfth.
Lucius Pompeius Octavianus requests the creation of a province called 
Argentina and requests the Provincial Praetorship.
Shall we create the Province?
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: I vote YES, although I agree that the province 
should be called Argentinia.
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas (though I am with Germanicus in wishing it 
were called Argentinia).
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES  Although I think it is more a matter of 
the Senate approving what has already been created.
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas.
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;  
ITEM 12a PASSES 

Shall we make him the Provincial Praetor? 
L. Cornelius Sulla: Yes
A. Gryllus Graecis: Yes
M. Iunius: Yes
C. Aelius Ericius: Yes.
M. Cassius Julianus: YES
Patricia Cassia: Uti rogas.
M. Mucius Scaevola Magister: UTI ROGAS
M. Minucius Audens: YES (Vti Rogas)!
C. Tullius Cicero: Vti rogas.
N. Moravius Vado: UTI ROGAS/YES
Q. Fabius Maximus: Uti Rogas
M. Iucundia Flavia: VTI ROGAS
M. Marcius Rex: UTI ROGAS
T. Labienus Fortunatus: UTI ROGAS
D. Iunius Palladius: Palladius votes yes
L Equitius Cincinnatus: Vti rogas (Yes)
M. Octavius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS.
Flavius Vedius Germanicus: VTI ROGAS
YES 18; NO 0; AB 0;  
ITEM 12b PASSES

Senator A. Probus cast the following votes too late to count: 
Alexander Probus: 
Item I - No
Item II -Yes
Item III - Yes
Item IIII - Yes
Item V - Yes
Item VI - Yes
Item VII - Yes
Item VIII - A -  No
              - B - Yes
Item VIIII - A - Yes
               - B - No
Item X - Yes
Item XI - Yes
Item XII - Yes (with an additional note)
According to the last item I would like to post a question. What if few 
years after we will have other citizens in Chile, Uruguai, Paraguai and 
Bolivia? Will we create separate provinces for every  national country or 
will try to simpliify the things uniting some of them into one NR 
province. 
My opinion is to createa province with a different name than one national 
state in the regio. That name may to be acceptable for the potential 
citizens from all  the national states in the regio. On the other hand 
Argentina is a very big country so she could be a separate province. I 
would 
like to hear opinions on that issue of colleagues more experienced with 
the 
situation of America Australis.

End of voting record

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Valete,

Lucius Sergius Australicus Obstinatus
Tribunus Plebis
  

12/05/2000

Senatus Consulta | Tabularivm | Main Page | Master Index

 ofs