Why do you not combine in enacting a law that there shall be no intermarriage between rich and poor?
That which has in all places and always been the business of private regulations, that a woman might marry into whatever family she has been engaged to, and that each man might take a wife out of whatever family he had contracted with, that ye shackle with the restraints of a most tyrannical law, by which ye sever the bonds of civil society and split one state into two.

Why do ye not enact a law that a plebeian shall not dwell in the neighbourhood of a patrician?
that he shall not go the same road with him?
that he shall not enter the same banquet with him?
that he shall not stand in the same forum?
For what else is there in the matter, if a patrician man wed a plebeian woman, or a plebeian a patrician?
What right, pray, is thereby changed?
the children surely go with the father.

Nor is there any thing which we seek from intermarriage with you, except that we may be held in the number of human beings and fellow citizens; nor is there any reason why ye contest the point, except that it delights you to strive for insult and ignominy to us.
5.

"In a word, whether is the supreme power belonging to the Roman people, or is it yours?
Whether by the expulsion of kings has dominion been acquired for you or equal liberty for all?
It is fitting that the Roman people should be allowed to enact a law, if it please.

Or will ye decree a levy by way of punishment, according as each bill shall be proposed?
and as soon as I, as tribune, shall begin to call the tribes to give their votes, will you, forthwith, as consul, force the younger men to take the military oath, and lead them out to camp?
and will you threaten the commons?
will you threaten the tribune?
What, if you had not already twice experienced how little those threats availed against the united sense of the people?
Of course it was because you wished to consult for our interest, that you abstained from force.