by Demosthenes
Either depose, or take the oath of disclaimer.” Oath of Disclaimer “ [61]
It was plain enough, men of the jury, that they would do this — take the oath of disclaimer with eagerness. Well, then, that they may at once be convicted of perjury, take, please, this deposition and challenge. Read.”Deposition and Challenge
The deponents testify that they were present when Apollodorus challenged Stephanus to give up his attendant slave to be put to the torture concerning the theft of the document, and Apollodorus was ready to write out the conditions on which the torture was to be administered; and that when Apollodorus tendered this challenge, Stephanus refused to give up the slave, but replied to Apollodorus that he might bring suit, if he chose, if he maintained that he was being in any way wronged by him.” [62]
Who is there, men of the jury, who, on a charge like that, if he were sure of his innocence, would not have accepted the torture? Then, by refusing the torture, he is convicted of the theft. Now do you think that a man would be ashamed of the reputation of having borne false witness, who did not shrink from being proved a thief? Or that he would hesitate to give false witness at the request of another, when, at no man’s bidding, he voluntarily committed a fraud? [63]
Now, men of the jury, while he might justly be made to pay the penalty for all these things, he deserves even more to be punished in your court for the rest of his conduct. Observe the kind of a life he has lived, and judge. For so long as it was the lot of Aristolochus, the banker, to enjoy prosperity, this fellow fawned upon him as he walked beside him, adapting his pace to his, and this is well known to many of you who are present here. [64] But when Aristolochus was ruined and lost his property, chiefly through having been plundered by this fellow and others of his stamp, Stephanus never stood by the son of Aristolochus, who was overburdened with lawsuits, nor aided him, but it was Apolexis or Solon or anybody else that helped him rather than he. Then he has courted Phormio and become intimate with him, choosing him out of all the Athenians; and he sailed to Byzantium as agent in his interest, when the Byzantines detained Phormio’s vessels, and he pleaded his cause against the Calchedonians, and he has thus flagrantly given false witness against me. [65] A man, then, who is a flatterer of those in prosperity, and who betrays these same men if they fall into adversity; who out of all the host of good and worthy citizens of Athens deals with not a single one on the basis of equality, but willingly fawns upon people like Phormio; who takes no thought whether he is going to injure any of his kinsfolk by these actions, or whether he is going to win an evil reputation in the minds of other men, but thinks only of one thing, how he may enrich himself — ought you not to loathe this man as a common enemy of the whole human race? I certainly think so. [66] This course of action, involving so great disgrace, he has adopted, men of Athens, with a view to evading his duties to the state and to conceal his wealth, that he may make secret profits by means of the bank, and never serve as choregus or trierarch, or perform any other of the public duties which befit his station. And he has accomplished this object. Here is a proof. Although he has so large an estate that he gave his daughter a marriage portion of one hundred minae, he has never been seen by you to perform any public service whatever, even the very slightest. And yet how much more honorable it would have been to be proved a man of public spirit and one zealous in the performance of his duties to the state, than a flatterer and a bearer of false testimony! But the fellow would do anything to get money. [67] Surely, men of Athens, you ought to feel indignation rather toward those who are rascals in wealth than toward those who are such in poverty. In the case of the latter the pressure of their needy state affords them some excuse in the eyes of those who look on the matter with human sympathy, whereas those who, like this fellow, are rascals while possessing abundance, could find no reasonable excuse to offer, but will be shown to act as they do from a spirit of shameful greed and covetousness and insolence, and a resolve to make their own plots stronger than the laws. Not one of these things is to your interest, but rather that the weak, if he suffers wrong, should be able to get redress from the wealthy. And he will be able, if you punish those who are thus manifestly rascals while possessing wealth. [68]
Neither should the airs which the fellow puts on as he walks with sullen face along the walls be properly considered as marks of sobriety, but rather as marks of misanthropy. In my opinion a man whom no misfortune has befallen, and who is in no lack of the necessaries of life, but who none the less habitually maintains this demeanor,has reviewed the matter and reached the conclusion in his own mind, that to those who walk in a simple and natural way and wear a cheerful countenance, men draw near unhesitatingly with requests and proposals, whereas they shrink from drawing near in the first place to affected and sullen characters. [69] This demeanor, then, is nothing but a cloak to cover his real character, and he shows therein the rudeness and malignity of his temper. Here is a proof. You have been far better off than you deserved, yet to whom among the whole host of Athenians have you ever made a contribution? To whom have you ever lent aid, or to whom done a kindness? [70] You could not name a single one; but while lending money at interest and regarding the misfortunes and necessities of others as your own good fortune, you ejected your own uncle Nicias from the house of his fathers, you have taken from your own mother-in-law the resources upon which she lived, and you have, in so far as it depended upon you, rendered homeless the son of Archedemus. No one ever exacted payment from a defaulter as rigorously as you exact interest from your debtors. A man, then, whom you find to be so brutal and so savage on all occasions, are you going to fail to punish him when you have caught him in the very act of wrongdoing? In that case, men of the jury, you will do what is an outrage and in no sense right. [71]
It is fitting therefore, men of Athens, that you should wax indignant also against Phormio, for bringing this man forward as a witness, when you see the shamelessness of his character and his ingratitude. For I fancy you all know that if, when the fellow was for sale, a cook or an artisan in any other trade had bought him, he would have learned the trade of his master and been far removed from the prosperity which now is his. [72] But since my father into whose possession he came, was a banker and taught him letters and instructed him in his business and put him in control of large sums of money, he has become wealthy, having found the good luck which brought him into our family the foundation of all his present wealth. [73] It is outrageous, then, O Earth and the gods, and worse than outrageous, that he should suffer those who made him a Greek instead of a barbarian and a man of note instead of a slave, and who brought him to such great prosperity, to live in dire want while he has means and is rich, and that he should have come to such a pitch of shamelessness that he cannot bring himself to share with us the good fortune which we shared with him. [74] But for himself he has not scrupled to marry his mistress, and he dwells as husband with her who scattered the sweatmeats over him when he was bought as a slave, nor to write a clause giving himself a marriage portion of five talents in addition to the large sums of which he became master, inasmuch as they were in the custody of my mother — for why do you suppose he wrote in the will the clause “and all else which she has I give to Archippê”? — while he looks with indifference on my daughters, who are doomed through poverty to grow old in maidenhood with none to dower them. [75] If Phormio had been poor, and it had been our fortune to be wealthy, and if, in the course of nature, anything had happened to me, this fellow’s sons would have claimed my daughters in marriage — the sons of the slave would have claimed the daughters of the master! For they are their uncles, since the man married my mother; but seeing that it is we who are poor, he will not help to portion them off, but he talks and talks, and reckons up the amount of property which I possess. [76]
For this is the most absurd thing of all. Up to this day he has never seen fit to render an account of the money of which he has defrauded me, but enters a special plea that my action is not even admissible; yet he charges against me what I have receive
d from the estate of my fathers. Other slaves one may see called to strict account by their masters, but here we see the very opposite: the fellow, though a slave, calls his master to account, thinking thereby to show him forth as a vile fellow and a prodigal. [77] For myself, men of Athens, in the matter of my outward appearance, my fast walking, and my loud voice, I judge that I am not one of those favored by nature; for in so far as I annoy others without benefiting myself, I am in many respects at a disadvantage; but since I am moderate in all my personal expenses, it will be seen that I live a much more orderly life than Phormio and others who are like him. [78] Whatever concerns the state, however, and all that concerns you, I perform, as you know, as lavishly as I can; for I am well aware that for you who are citizens by birth it is sufficient to perform public services as the laws require; we on the contrary who are created citizens ought to show that we perform them as a grateful payment of a debt. Cease, then, to fling into my teeth matters for which I should properly win commendation. [79] But, Phormio, whom of the citizens have I hired for prostitution, as you have done? Show me. Whom have I deprived of the citizenship of which I was deemed worthy, and of the right of free speech in the city, as you did in the case of the man whom you dishonored? Whose wife have I debauched, as you have the wives of many? — among them her to whom this god-detested fellow built the monument near that of his mistress at a cost of more than two talents. And he did not see that a structure, being of that sort, would be a monument, not of her tomb, but of the wrong which because of him she had done to her husband. [80] Do you, then, who perform acts like these, and who have given such manifest proofs of your outrageous conduct, dare to scrutinize the manner of life of anyone else? By day you act soberly, but the whole night long you indulge in actions for which death is the penalty. He is a knave, men of Athens, a knave and a villain, and has been such from of old, ever since he left the temple of Castor and Pollux. Here is the proof. If he had been honest, he would have managed his master’s business, and remained poor. But as it is, having got control of so large an amount of money that he could steal from it all that he now possesses without detection, he regards what he holds, not as a debt, but as an inherited patrimony. [81] And yet, by the gods, if I had led you off to prison as a thief caught in the act, piling upon your back — if this had been in any way possible — the wealth which you now possess, and had then demanded of you, if you denied having got this wealth by thievery, to refer me to the source from which you got it, to whom would you have referred me? Your father did not give it to you; you did not find it; you had not got it from some other source when you come into our family; for you were a barbarian when you were purchased. Have you, then, a man who ought to have been publicly put to death for what you have done, after saving your skin, after securing for yourself a city with our money, and after being allowed to beget children as brothers to your own masters — have you entered a special plea that our action for the sums claimed from you is inadmissible? [82] And, then, did you speak evil of me, and inquire what manner of man my father was? Men of Athens, who would not have been indignant at this? For my part, though it beseem me to have less of pride than any of you, yet I judge that I may at least have more than Phormio, while as for him, though there be no one else than whom he should have less, yet he should have less than I; for, assuming that we are the sort of people your words made us out to be, you, Phormio, were none the less our slave. [83]
There is perhaps something else which one of them may say: that Pasicles, although he is my brother, makes no charge against Phormio for these same actions. Well, I will speak about Pasicles, too, men of Athens, though I beg and implore you to pardon me, if I am so carried away by indignation at the outrages I have received from my own slaves as to be unable to restrain myself; I will not keep silent, but will declare what until now I pretended not to hear when others said it; — [84] I consider Pasicles to be my brother on my mother’s side, but whether on my father’s side also, I do not know; but I am afraid that the wrongs which Phormio has done us began with Pasicles. For when he joins in pleading the cause of the slave and dishonors his brother, when he fawns upon those, and curries the favor of those, who ought to seek his favor, to what suspicion does this naturally give rise? Away, then, with Pasicles, and let him be called your son instead of your master, and my adversary （since he so chooses） instead of my brother. [85]
I bid adieu to this fellow and appeal to those to whom my father left me as my helpers and friends — to you, men of the jury. And I beg and entreat and implore you, do not suffer my daughters and myself through our poverty to become a source of malicious joy to my own slaves and to his flatterers. My father gave you a thousand shields and made himself serviceable to you in many ways, and five times served as trierarch, voluntarily equipping the ships and manning them at his own expense. I remind you of this, not because I consider that you are under obligation to me — for it is I that am under obligation to you, — but in order that I may not suffer unworthy treatment without your knowing it. For that would not be a credit to you any more than to me. [86]
I have much to say regarding the indignities which I have suffered, but I see that I have not enough water left in the clock. I will tell you, therefore, how I think you will all best come to know the enormity of the wrongs that have been done me. You must each of you consider what slave he left at home, and then imagine that you have suffered from him the same treatment that I have suffered from Phormio. Do not take into consideration that they are severally Syrus or Manes or what not, while this fellow is Phormio. The thing is the same — they are slaves, and he was a slave; you are masters, and I was master. [87] Believe, then, that it is fitting now for me to exact the penalty which each one of you would claim; and in the interest of the laws and of the oaths which you have taken as jurors punish the man who has robbed me of a verdict by giving false testimony, and make him an example to others, remembering all that you have heard from me and bearing it in mind, if they attempt to mislead you, and meeting them at every point. If they deny that they have borne witness to all the facts, ask them these questions, “What stands written in the deposition? Why did you not strike it out at the time? What is the counter-plea in the custody of the archons?” [88] If they declare that they have testified, one person that he lived as ward under a will, another that he served as guardian, and another that he has the will in his possession, demand of them, “What will? What were the provisions contained in it?” For to the deposition to which these men bore witness no one of the others has given corroborative testimony. But if they try whining tactics, you should consider that the one wronged is more deserving of pity than those about to be punished. If you act in this way, you will succor me, and you will restrain these men from their excessive adulation; and to your own satisfaction you will have rendered a righteous verdict.
APOLLODORUS AGAINST STEPHANUS 2
Translated by A. T. Murray
Even of myself, men of the jury, I could pretty well suspect that this fellow Stephanus would not be at a loss for something to say in defence of his testimony; and that he would seek to mislead and deceive you in his speech by alleging that he has not borne witness to everything written in the deposition. For he is a knave, and there are many to write speeches and give advice on Phormio’s behalf. Furthermore it is but natural that those who undertake to give false testimony should at the start prepare some means of defending it. [2] But I bid you to bear this in mind, that in his address, long as it was, he nowhere brought forward witnesses to prove to you either that he was himself present when my father made this will, so as to know that this is a copy of the will which my father made, or that he saw the document opened which they declare my father drew up and left as his will. [3] When, however, my opponent has testified that what was written in the document was a copy of the will of Pasio, but is unable to prove either that my father made a will or that he was himself present and saw it when my father drew it up, is he not manifestly proved to have given false testimony? [4]<
br />
If, now, he maintains that it was a challenge and not a deposition, he is not telling the truth. For all pieces of evidence which the parties to a suit bring before the court when they tender challenges to one another, they bring in by means of depositions. Otherwise you would not know whether what they severally say is true or false, if they did not bring forward the witnesses also. But when they do bring in witnesses, you rely upon these as being responsible, and so from the statements and the testimony offered you cast your votes for what seems to you to be a just verdict. [5] I wish therefore to prove to you that the deposition is not a challenge, and to show you how they ought to have deposed if the challenge was given, which it was not,— “The deponents testify that they were present before the arbitrator Teisias, when Phormio challenged Apollodorus to open the document which Amphias, the brother-in-law of Cephisophon, produced, and that Apollodorus refused to open it.” If they had given their evidence in this way, they would have appeared to be speaking the truth. But to depose that what was written in the document which Phormio produced was a copy of the will of Pasio, without having been present when Pasio made the will, or knowing that he had made one, does this not seem to you to be a manifest piece of insolence? [6]
And surely, if he says that he believed this to be true because Phormio said it was, it would be like the same man to believe him when he said this, and to testify to it at his bidding. The laws, however, do not say this, but ordain that a man may testify to what he knows, or to matters at the doing of which he was present, and that his testimony must be committed to writing in order that it may not be possible to subtract anything from what is written, or to add anything to it. [7] Hearsay evidence they do not admit from a living person, but only from one who is dead; but in the case of those who are sick or absent from the country they allow evidence to be introduced, provided it be in written form, and the absent witness and the one submitting his testimony shall alike be liable to action under the same impeachment, in order that, if the absent witness acknowledges his evidence, he may be liable to action for giving false testimony, and if he does not acknowledge it, the one who submitted his testimony may be liable. [8] Now Stephanus here, without knowing that my father left a will or having ever been present when he drew one up, but having been told this by Phormio, has given hearsay evidence which is false, and has done it in defiance of the law.