10in a country so divided and tossed by frequent change of rulers between liberty and licence even small events caused serious disturbance. it happened that vibius crispus,224 a man whose wealth, influence, and ability had won him a reputation that was great rather than good, had impeached before the senate a man of equestrian rank, called annius faustus, who 119had been a professional informer under nero. the senate had recently in galba's principate passed a resolution authorizing the prosecution of informers. this resolution had been variously applied from time to time, and interpreted rigorously or leniently according as the defendant was helpless or influential. but it still retained some terrors. crispus, moreover, had exerted all his powers to secure the conviction of the man who had informed against his brother.225 he had, in fact, induced a large proportion of the senate to demand that faustus should be sent to execution undefended and unheard. however, with others, the defendant gained a great advantage from his prosecutor's undue influence. 'we must give him time,' they argued, 'the charges must be published: however hateful the criminal his case must be properly heard.' at first this advice prevailed. the trial was postponed for a few days. at length came the conviction of faustus, which aroused in the country less satisfaction than his vile character warranted. people recalled the fact that crispus himself had turned informer with pecuniary profit. it was not the penalty but the prosecutor that was unpopular.