Public Senate Session Discussion

The social and political heart of the respublica community

Moderators: Publius Iunius Brutus, Lucius Aurelius Curio, Titus Flavius Severus, Lucius Livius Seneca, Marcus Flavius Celsus, Tiberia Salvia Alba

Re: Public Senate Session Discussion

Postby Gaius Florius Lupus » Thu Feb 01, 2018 12:24 am

Salve amice!

Maybe you are right, but tell me, why was in ancient Rome a quaestor in charge of the treasury? Even back then it was the first step in the cursus honorum. Our ancestors cannot have been totally naïve.

Of course we could also place the treasury in the hand of two praetores aerarii as it was done in imperial times or leave it to the Comitia Curiata as you suggested.
But however we would manage it, it should always reflect reality. Real life necessities have to come first, if we do not want to do role playing. If a job has certain requirements, exempli gratia physical presence in Canada, then not just anybody can run for this office, but only someone living there and fulfilling all requirements. We can even simply use the standard terminology of Canadian law and call the magistrates in charge "directors" (to be more specific directores aerarii), since director is a Latin title anyway. It would help to bring this institution into the real world, if our internal titles were the same as those used under Canadian law.

Yes, our assets are currently only the website and the domain name. Later it might be coins, altars, small temples et cetera.

When it comes to safeguards against fraud, nothing was able to prevent the CFO of Nova Roma {Sulla) from running away with their treasury, although the corporation was fully integrated into their republic with the senators being the directors of the corporation. After all there is no absolute protection against embezzlement, in no nation in this world and in no corporation, as we both know living in countries that have a reputation for this phenomenon.
Only electing the right persons can really prevent that. In our case we could be pretty sure that P. Iunius Brutus and your father L. Curtius Philo would certainly not run away with it and respect the decisions of the elected magistrates and the Senate.
The Roman principle of collegiality would also prevent embezzlement, since the agreement of more than one person would be required for every transaction, either two directors or the unanimous vote of the Comitia Curiata as you suggested.

The only difference to the current situation would be that Canadian law would not legally recognize our Republic and the vote of the Senate and the comitia, because they would not formally be part of the corporation. We can only trust our elected directors that they would in their majority always recognize the authority of our republican institutions. I do not think that real enforcers (e.g. lictores) would be necessary to ensure this. The threat of internal measures like loss of optime iure status or ban from the forum should be enough.
Since we have not much expenses, we can furthermore keep the treasury quite small. Major projects like TEMPLVM.ORG could operate as collegia under our Republic with their own local corporation dedicated to this specific project. The same is true for the provinces, which could all have their own local corporation to manage their funds, if they think they need one.

A corporations is a tool to be used according to our needs. It is not what our community is.

Vale!
User avatar
Gaius Florius Lupus
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:33 am
Location: Africa Magna

Re: Public Senate Session Discussion

Postby Gaius Curtius Philo » Thu Feb 01, 2018 3:18 am

Salve amice!

We currently, besides the domain names and the forum, have also around $3000 in assets. So basically your suggestion is to merely decouple the Republic from the Corporation. Lictor was the title given to the representatives of the Comitia Curiata after it was reformed, it does not have the same sense as a Lictor guardian of a Magistrate. I would like to know what effects that would legally have but I agree that being subjected to the Bylaws seems rather unnecessary (for example, we should be able to include minors in our Republic without changing the Bylaws). But even if such a change was approved, I would still maintain the Corporation representatives as the CC for the CC has proven to be capable in doing that.

It is something worth asking the People as a whole.

Vale
"Ignis aurum probat" - Seneca
C. Curtius L. f. Vot. Philo Aurelianus
User avatar
Gaius Curtius Philo
 
Posts: 1591
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2016 3:56 pm
Location: Praia Grande, São Paulo, Brazil

Re: Public Senate Session Discussion

Postby Gaius Florius Lupus » Fri Feb 23, 2018 12:15 pm

Salvete Quirites!

I would like to show a recent quote from Sulla of NR and the argument he defends the dictatorship in Nova Roma all based on the NR corporation.

The Bylaws govern Nova Roma. [...]
There is no Social Contract in Nova Roma!
The Bylaws govern the Organization and what develops must come from the
Bylaws. [...] If you are going to
try to subvert the bylaws of Nova Roma. If you are going to try to subvert
the Board of Directors then there will be consequences.


The existence of the corporation does not protect the Republic, it is the main threat to it.

Valete!
User avatar
Gaius Florius Lupus
 
Posts: 549
Joined: Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:33 am
Location: Africa Magna

Previous

Return to Main Forum