2.4.29 In fact, it is inevitable for them, when they say the same things in many courts, either that they would arouse the disgust as cold and reheated foods, or that (their) unfruitful utensil (=stock phrase), just as it is worn out chez vain poor people (after having been used) in many and various uses, arouses shame, because memory of listeners has been caught (by it) many times.
2.4.30-1 In addition to this is the fact that there is so hardly any commonplace which could stick to (the real) cases, unless it is tied (to them) with some bond of (=taken from) proper questions. It is apparent that it (=commonplace) is not so much inserted as applied, either since it is not similar to others (=other passages), or since it generally tends to be taken hardly aptly, not because it is desired, but because it is ready; just as some people summon very wordy themes for the sake of sententiae, while sententia must be born from themes.
2.4.32 Thus these things are beautiful and useful (only) if they are raised from causes; Otherwise, however beautiful an elocution is, unless it reaches victory (in court), it is certainly unnecessary and at the same time contrary (=not useful). Let it be sufficient so far indeed to digress.
2.4.33 Laudation and vituperation of laws require more abilities, which will be suffice for the highest jobs. Whether this exercise would be accommodated more in suasoriae or controversiae differs in the customs and the laws of the states. For, among Greeks, the proposer of laws used to be called to judges; It has been a custom for Romans to persuade and dissuade in front of a meeting. In either way, a few and almost certain things are said about these things (=laws): for there are three genres, (the genre) of sacred, public, and private law.
2.4.34 This division pertains to laudation (of laws) more (than its vituperation) if someone goes up this division step by step, “because it is provided as a law,” “as a public law,” and then “as a low for the religion of gods.” Those things, about which we used to inquire, are common to all (the genres).
2.4.35 For, one is able to doubt either...  about the validity of those who are proposing, just as about that of P. Clodius, who was argued to have been chosen as a tribune illegaly; or  about the validity of the proposal itself, which is various: A law is said...
[2-1] not to have been promulgated for three market days perchance;
[2-2] to have been or to be enforced not on a suitable day, against vito, or against auspices or something which stands against laws;
[2-3] to contradict something of existing laws.
2.4.36 But these things are not pertaining to the elementary exercises: For they (=exercises) are without embracement of (=not including) persons, times, or cases.
The remainings are treated almost the same in both real and fictional contests of this kind (=forensic ones).
2.4.37 For, defects are either in words or in things: in words, it is asked whether they (=the words) signify enough or whether there is anything ambiguous in them (=words); in things, whether a law is consistent with itself or whether it must be carried to the past or to individuals. It is truely the most common to ask whether it would be honourable or useful.
2.4.38 And I don't ignore that more parts (=categories) are made by most people; However, we include justice, piety, religion, and something similar to them in (the genre) "honourable".