Delphi Complete Works of Demosthenes

Home > Other > Delphi Complete Works of Demosthenes > Page 79
Delphi Complete Works of Demosthenes Page 79

by Demosthenes


  To prove that I am speaking the truth in this, take, please, these depositions also.” Depositions “ [14]

  When the matter stood thus, and the people whom the plaintiff had introduced to us would not give up the money, and it was clear that we were rightfully in possession of what we had purchased, he begged, and implored, and besought us to sell the property. As he made this demand and begged me most earnestly — there is nothing he did not do — I gave way in this matter also. [15] I saw, however, men of Athens, that he was a man of evil disposition, that at the outset he had made charges to us against Mnesicles, and then had quarrelled with Evergus, with whom he was on terms of closest friendship; that at the first, when I returned from my voyage, he pretended that he was glad to see me, but when the time came for him to do what was right, he became surly with me; that he was a friend to all men until he got some advantage and attained what he wanted, and thereafter became their foe and was at variance with them; [16] I therefore thought it best, if I withdrew and assumed the position of vendor in this man’s interest, that I should obtain a full release and discharge from all claims, and thus make a final settlement with him. This was agreed to, and he gave me a release in full, while I, as he begged me to do, assumed the position of vendor of the property, exactly as I had myself bought it from Mnesicles. Having, then, recovered my money, and having done the plaintiff no wrong whatsoever, I imagined, by the gods, that, no matter what should happen, he would never bring a suit against me. [17]

  These, men of the jury, are the facts regarding which you are to cast your votes, these are the grounds upon which I have entered the special plea that this baseless and malicious suit is not maintainable. I shall bring forward witnesses who were present when I was given a release and discharge by the plaintiff, and shall then proceed to prove that under the law the suit is not maintainable.

  Please read this deposition.” Deposition”

  Now, please, read the deposition of the purchasers, that you may be assured that I sold the property at the bidding of the plaintiff and to the persons to whom he bade me sell it.” Deposition “ [18]

  Not only have I these witnesses to prove that I have been released and am now the object of a baseless and malicious charge, but Pantaenetus himself is a witness also. For when, in bringing suit against Evergus, he left me out of the question, he himself bore witness that he had no further claim against me. For surely, assuming that he had the same charge to bring against both for the same wrongdoing, he would not, when both were at hand, have passed over the one and brought suit against the other. However, that the laws do not allow a fresh suit to be brought regarding matters that have been thus settled you know, I presume, even without my telling you.

  Nevertheless, read them this law also.” Law “ [19]

  You hear the law, men of Athens, expressly stating that in cases where anyone has given a release and discharge, there shall be no further action. And that both these have been effected between the plaintiff and myself, you have heard from the witnesses. One should not, of course, bring suit in any case when the law forbids it, but least of all ought one in a case like this. For in regard to sales made by the state, one might claim that it had made the sale unjustly, or had sold what was not its own; [20] and in regard to court decisions it might be claimed that the decision had been rendered through error; and in all other cases where the law forbids action exception might plausibly be taken to each one. But when anyone has himself yielded to argument and given a release, he cannot in the very nature of the case charge himself with having acted unjustly. Those who bring suit in defiance of any other of these provisions fail to abide by what others have determined to be just; but he who again brings suit in matters regarding which he has given a release fails to abide by his own decision. Therefore, against all such your anger should be particularly severe. [21]

  Well then, that he released me from all claims, when I sold the slaves to him, I have proved to you; and that the laws do not allow suits to be brought in such cases you have heard from the law which has just been read. However, that no one of you, men of Athens, may suppose that it is because I am at a disadvantage regarding the rights of the matters at issue that I have recourse to this special plea, I propose to show you that in every one of his charges against me his statements are false. [22]

  Read the complaint itself, which he brings against me.”Complaint

  Nicobulus has harmed me by laying a plot against me and against my property, having ordered Antigenes, his slave, to take away from my slave the silver which he was bringing to be paid to the state for the mining property which I bought for ninety minae, and having also caused me to be inscribed as debtor to the treasury for double that amount.” [23]

  Stop reading. All these charges which he has now lodged against me he previously made against Evergus, and won his suit. Now evidence has been brought before you in the opening of my speech that I was not in the country when these men quarrelled with one another; but the fact is clear from the complaint itself. For he nowhere stated that I have done any of these things, but, suggesting that I laid a plot against him and against his property, he declares that I ordered my slave to commit these acts; and in this he lies. For how could I have given this order, seeing that at the time I set sail I could by no possibility have had knowledge of what was going to happen here? [24] And then how absurd when he says that I plotted to disenfranchise him and bring him to utter ruin, to have written in the charge that I ordered a slave to do this, — a thing which even a citizen could not do to another citizen. What, then, is the meaning of this? I suppose that, being unable to refer to me the doing of any of these acts, but wishing to go on with his malicious suit, he wrote in the complaint that I had given the order. There was no sense in his charge, if he had not done this. [25]

  Read what follows.”Complaint

  And after I had become a debtor to the state, having stationed his slave Antigenes in my mining property at Thrasyllus, in full control of my works, although I forbade him . . .”

  Stop reading. In all this he will again be convicted of falsehood by the facts themselves; for he has written in the complaint that I stationed the slave and that he forbade me. But this was impossible in the case of one who was not in the country. Neither did I station anyone, seeing that I was in Pontus, nor did he forbid a man who was not in Athens. [26] How could he? What was it, then, that forced him to make this statement? I fancy that Evergus, at the time he made the mistakes for which he has paid the penalty, being on friendly terms with me and well known, took the slave from my house and stationed him at his own works to keep guard. If, then, he had written the truth, it would have been ridiculous. For, if Evergus stationed the slave there, wherein do I wrong you? It was to avoid this absurdity that he was compelled to write as he did, that his charge might be directed against me.

  Read what follows.”Complaint

  And then having persuaded my slaves to sit in the foundry to my prejudice.” [27]

  This is out-and-out impudence. Not only from my challenging him to give up these slaves for torture and from his refusing to do so, but from every circumstance of the case its falsehood is manifest. Why, pray, should I have induced them to do this? That, forsooth, I might get possession of them. But when the option was given me either to keep the property or to recover my money, I chose to recover my money; and of this you have heard the evidence.

  Nevertheless, read the challenge.” Challenge “ [28]

  Although he did not accept the challenge, but declined it, see what a charge he makes immediately thereafter.

  Read what comes next.”Complaint

  And having reduced the silver-ore which my slaves had dug, and keeping the silver smelted from that ore.”

  Again, how could this have been done by me when I was not here? — things, too, for which you won a judgement against Evergus? [29]

  Read the further charges.”Complaint

  And having sold my mining property and the slaves, contrary to the agreement
which he had made with me.”

  Stop reading. This far outdoes all the rest. For in the first place he says, “contrary to the agreement which he had made with me.” What agreement is this? We leased our own property to this man, at a rent equal to the interest on the loan; that was all. It was Mnesicles who sold it to us, in the presence of the plaintiff and at his request. [30] Afterwards in the same way we sold the property to others on the same terms upon which we had ourselves bought it, and the plaintiff not only urged but actually implored us to do so; for no one was willing to accept him as the vendor. What, then, does the agreement to lease it have to do with the matter? Why, most worthless of men, did you insert that clause?

  However, to prove that we resold the property at your request, and on the same terms as those upon which we ourselves bought it, read the deposition.” Deposition “ [31]

  You are yourself also a witness to this; for what we purchased for one hundred and five minae, this you afterward sold for three talents and twenty-six hundred drachmae. And yet who, if he had you as one to complete a final sale, would have given a single drachma?

  To prove that I speak the truth in this, call, please, the witnesses who establish the facts.” Witnesses “ [32]

  He has, then, received the sum which he agreed to take for his property, — he even begged me that I should assume the position of vendor for the sum which I had advanced — yet this same man sues me for two talents more. And the rest of the charges are even more outrageous.

  Read, please, the remainder of the complaint.” Complaint “ [33]

  Here he brings against me in one mass a host of dreadful charges; for he accuses me of assault and battery, outrage, and of violent wrongs even against heiresses. But for each of these wrongdoings actions are separate; they do not come before the same magistrates and they are not for the recovery of the same penalties. Assault and battery and crimes of violence come before the Forty; cases of outrage before the Thesmothetae; and all crimes against heiresses before the Archon. And the laws grant the filing of pleas to bar action also in case of charges brought before magistrates who have not due competency.

  Read them this law.” Law “ [34]

  Although I had entered this exception in bar of action in addition to the other, and although the Thesmothetae have not competency in the matters concerning which Pantaenetus is bringing his suit, it has been erased, and is not found in the plea as written. How this has come about it is for you to consider. To me, so long as I am able to produce the law itself, it makes not the slightest difference; for he will not be able to erase from your minds your power to know and understand the right. [35]

  Take also the mining law. For I think I can show you from this, too, that the action is not maintainable, and that I deserve thanks rather than to be made the object of a baseless and malicious charge.

  Read.” Law”

  This law has clearly defined in what cases mining actions may properly be brought. Observe — the law makes a man liable if he eject another from his workings; but I, far from ejecting the plaintiff, gave over to him and put him in possession of that of which another was seeking to deprive him; and I became the vendor of it at his request. [36] Yes, says he, but if one commit other wrongs concerning mines, for these, too, actions may be brought. Certainly, Pantaenetus; but what are these? If one smokes out another, if one makes an armed attack, if one makes cuttings which encroach upon another’s workings. These are the other cases; but I, of course, have done nothing of this sort to you, unless you hold that people who seek to recover what they had risked in a loan to you are making an armed attack. If you hold that view, you have mining suits against all those who risk their own money. [37] But there is no justice in that. For consider — if a man purchases a mine from the state, shall he disregard the general laws in accordance with which all men are bound to render and obtain justice, and bring suit in a mining court, if he borrows from another? — if he be evil spoken of? — if he be beaten? — if he charge one with theft? — if he fail to recover money advanced for another’s tax? — if, in short, he has any other ground for action? I think not. [38] Mining suits, in my judgement, are to be brought against those sharing in the business of mining and those who have bored through into another’s property, and, in short, against those engaged in mining who do any of the things mentioned in the law. But a man who has lent money to Pantaenetus, and by persistently sticking to him has with difficulty got it back, is not also to be made defendant in a mining suit; I should say not! [39]

  That I have, therefore, done no wrong to the defendant and that the suit is not admissible under the laws one may easily determine from a consideration of these points. So, as he had not a single valid argument to advance in support of his charges, but had even incorporated false statements in his complaint, and was bringing suit regarding claims for which he had given a release, last month, men of Athens, when I was on the point of entering the court, and the court-rooms had already been allotted to the jurymen, he came up to me and surrounded me with his minions (that gang of his fellow-conspirators), and did a most outrageous thing. [40] He read me a long challenge, demanding that a slave who, he claimed, was acquainted with the facts, should be put to the torture; and that, if the facts as alleged by him were true, I should have to pay him the damages charged without adjustment by the jury; but if they were false, Mnesicles, the torturer, should determine the value of the slave. When he had received sureties to this agreement from me and I had sealed the challenge (not that I thought it fair; [41] for how could it be fair that it should depend upon the body and life of a slave, whether I should be condemned to pay two talents, or the bringer of this malicious suit get off scot-free? But I, wishing to prevail by a preponderance of fair play, made this concession) — after this he again summoned me in the suit, as soon as he had taken back his deposits; so clear did he make it at once that he would not abide by the conditions which he had himself laid down. [42] But when we had come before the torturer, instead of opening the challenge, showing its contents, and proceeding in accordance with its terms to do what seemed right (for on account of the turmoil at that time and the fact that the case was about to be called, it was like this: I offer you this challenge. — I accept it. — Let me have your ring. — Take it. — Who is your surety? — This man here. — and I had taken no copy or anything else of that sort); instead of acting in the way of which I speak, he had brought with him a different challenge, insisting that he should himself torture the man, and he laid hold of him, dragged him this way and that, and went beyond all bounds in blackguardly action. [43] On my part, men of the jury, I was led to reflect what gain there is in a life molded to serve one’s ends. For it seemed to me that I was suffering this treatment because I was despised as one who lived a simple and natural life, and that I was paying a heavy penalty in having to submit to this.

  However, to prove that I was compelled to give a counter-challenge contrary to what I thought was right, that I offered to give up the slave, and that I am speaking the truth in this, read the challenge.” Challenge “ [44]

  Since he refused this, and refused the challenge which he himself gave at the first, I wonder what in the world he will have to say to you. But that you may know who it is at whose hands he claims to have suffered these indignities — behold him! This is the man who dispossessed Pantaenetus; this is the man who was stronger than the friends of Pantaenetus, and stronger than the laws. For I myself was not in Athens; even he does not make that charge. [45]

  I wish to tell you also the means by which he misled the former jury, and convicted Evergus, that you may realize that in this trial also there will be no limit to his impudence and that he will shrink from no falsehoods. More than this; in regard to his present suit against me, you will find my means of defence are the same as those of Evergus, which is the most convincing proof that Evergus has been the victim of a malicious and baseless charge. For in addition to all the other accusations the plaintiff charged that Evergus came to hi
s home in the country, and made his way into the apartments of his daughters, who were heiresses, and of his mother; and he brought with him into court the laws concerning heiresses. [46] And yet up to this day he has never had the case examined before the Archon, whom the law appoints to have charge of such matters, and before whom the wrongdoer runs the risk of having punishment or fine adjudged against him, while by the prosecutor redress is sought without risk; nor has he impeached either me or Evergus as wrongdoers, but he made these charges in the court-room, and secured a verdict for two talents. [47] For, I take it, it would have been an easy matter for Evergus, if he had known in advance (as under the laws he should have known) the charge on which he was being tried, to set forth the truth of the matter and the justice of his cause, and so win acquittal; but in a mining suit regarding matters concerning which he could never have imagined that he would be accused, it was hard to find, offhand, means to free himself from the false charges; and the indignation of the jurymen, who were misled by the plaintiff, found him guilty in the matter upon which they sat in judgement. [48] And yet do you think that the man who deceived those jurymen will hesitate to try to deceive you? — or that he comes into court with his confidence fixed upon the facts, and not rather upon assertions and upon the witnesses who are in league with him (that foul blackguard Procles, the tall fellow there, and Stratocles, the smoothest-tongued of men and the basest), and in his readiness to weep and wail without disguise or shame? [49] But you are so far from deserving pity, that more than any man in the world you should rightly be detested for the deeds you have wrought — you who, owing one hundred and five minae and not being able to satisfy your creditors, and then finding men who helped you to raise the money and enabled you to do what was right by those who originally made the loan, are seeking, quite apart from the wrongs you committed against them in regard to the loan itself, also to deprive them of their civic rights. In the case of other men one may see borrowers having to give up their property, but in your case it is the lender who has come to this plight, and, having lent a talent, has been forced to pay two talents as the victim of a baseless charge; [50] and I, who lent forty minae, am defendant in this suit for two talents. Again, on property on which you were never able to borrow more than one hundred minae, and which you sold outright for three talents and two thousand drachmae, you have, as it seems, sustained damages to the amount of four talents! From whom? From my slave, you will say. But what citizen would let himself be ousted from his own property by a slave? Or who would say that it is right that my slave be held responsible for acts, for which the plaintiff has brought action against Evergus and obtained a verdict? [51] Besides all this, the plaintiff has himself given him a release from all charges of this kind. He ought not to be stating these charges now, nor to have inserted them in the challenge in which he demanded the slave for torture, but to have instituted suit against him, and to have prosecuted me as his owner. As it is, he has instituted suit against me, but accuses him. This the laws do not permit. For whoever instituted suit against the master, and charged the facts against his slave — as though the slave had any authority of his own? [52]

 

‹ Prev