entrusted to two magistrates instead of one, and not for their lifetime, but for one year only, at the end of which they were morally, though not legally, bound to resign it. So long as they held it they could use it undiminished in war, and with hardly a single direct limitation in the city itself. They were nominally quite independent of each other; and if the action of the one crossed that of the other, the result was simply that imperium was hampered by imperium, not by any new factor in the constitution. These two yearly kings could imprison, scourge, and put to death, could issue edicts and command armies, and could appoint their successors, just as the king for life had done. In the eye of the law the imperium was undiminished; it only changed hands once every year.
Yet while keeping this precious political conception to all appearance intact, the aristocracy contrived to prevent its being so used as again to override the custom of the State, or indeed to interfere with their own interests. We saw that the king had been expected to consult his Senate — a custom said to have been neglected by the second Tarquinius. No law was passed, now or at any time, which compelled the magistrate to ask or take adyice, but the altered conditions under which the imperium was now held made it practically necessary for him to do so. He would be himself an adviser after his year of office was over, and moreover he would be, as a private individual, liable to criticism in the Senate, and to accusation before the people. He would wish to strengthen himself
