Delphi Complete Works of Demosthenes

by Demosthenes

  We on our part, as soon as we learned what had taken place, were greatly dismayed at his action, and went to this man, who was the prime mover in the whole plot, complaining angrily, as was natural, that although we had expressedly stipulated in the agreement that the ship should sail to no other port than to Athens, and had lent our money on this condition, he had left us open to suspicion with people who might wish to accuse and say that we also had been partners to the conveyance of the grain to Rhodes; and complaining also that he and his partner, despite their agreement to do so, had not brought the ship back to your port. [12] When, however, we made no headway in talking about the agreement and our rights, we demanded that he at any rate pay us back the amount loaned with the interest as originally agreed upon. But the fellow treated us with such insolence as to declare that he would not pay the interest stipulated in the agreement. “If, however,” he said, “you are willing to accept the interest calculated in proportion to the voyage completed, I will give you,” said he, “the interest as far as Rhodes; but more I will not give.” Thus he made a law for himself and refused to comply with the just terms of the agreement. [13]

  When we said that we could not acquiesce in anything like this, considering that, were we to do so, it would be an admission that we too had been engaged in conveying grain to Rhodes, he became even more insistent, and came up to us, bringing a host of witnesses, asserting that he was ready to pay us the principal with interest as far as Rhodes; not that he had any more intention to pay, men of the jury, but suspecting that we should be unwilling to accept the money on account of the charges to which our action might give rise. The result made this clear. [14] For when some of your citizens, men of Athens, who chanced to be present advised to accept what was offered and to sue for the amount under dispute, but not to admit the reckoning of the interest to Rhodes until the case should be settled we agreed to this. We were not unaware, men of the jury, of our rights under the agreement, but we thought it better to suffer some loss and to make a concession, so as not to appear litigious. But when the fellow saw that we were on the point of accepting his offer, he said, “Well, then, cancel the agreement.” “We cancel the agreement? [15] Indeed we will not. However, as far as concerns any money you may pay we will in the presence of the banker agree to annul the agreement; but cancel it in its entirety we will not, until we get a verdict on the matters under dispute. For what just plea shall we have, or on what can we rely when we come to a contest at law, whether we have to appear before an arbitrator or before a court, if we have cancelled the agreement on which we rely for the recovery of our rights?” [16] Such was our answer to him, men of the jury, and we demanded of this fellow Dionysodorus that he should not disturb or annul the agreement which these men themselves admitted to be binding, but that in regard to the amount he should pay us what he himself acknowledged to be due and to leave the settlement of the sum under dispute （with the understanding that the money was available） to the decision of one or more arbitrators, as he might prefer, to be chosen from among the merchants of this port. Dionysodorus, however, would not listen to anything of this sort, but because we refused to accept what he agreed to pay and cancel the agreement altogether, he has for two years kept and made use of our capital; [17] and what is the most outrageous thing of all, men of the jury, the fellow himself gets maritime interest from other people from our money, lending it, not at Athens or for a voyage to Athens, but for voyages to Rhodes and Egypt, while to us who lent him money for a voyage to your port he thinks he need do nothing that justice demands

  To prove that I am speaking the truth, the clerk shall read you the challenge which I gave Dionysodorus concerning these matters.” Challenge “ [18]

  This challenge, then, we tendered to this Dionysodorus again and again, and we exposed the challenge to public view over a period of many days. He, however, declared that we must be absolute simpletons, if we supposed him to be senseless enough to go before an arbitrator — who would most certainly condemn him to pay the debt — when he might come into court bringing the money with him, and then, if he could hoodwink you he would go back keeping possession of what was another’s, and if he could not, he would then pay the money. Thus he showed that he had no confidence in the justice of his case, but that he wished to make trial of you. [19]

  You have heard, then, men of the jury, what Dionysodorus has done; and as you have heard I fancy you have long been amazed at his audacity, and have wondered upon what in the world he relies in coming into court. For is it not the height of audacity, when a man who has borrowed money from the port of Athens, [20] and has expressly agreed in writing that his ship shall return to your port, or that, if she does not, he shall pay double the amount, has not brought the ship to the Peiraeus and does not pay his debt to the lenders; and as for the grain, has unladed that and sold it at Rhodes, and then despite all this dares to look into your faces? [21] But hear what he says in reply to this. He alleges that the ship was disabled on the voyage from Egypt, and that for this reason he was obliged to touch at Rhodes and unlade the grain there. And as a proof of this he states that he chartered ships from Rhodes and shipped some of his goods to Athens. This is one part of his defence, and here is another. [22] He claims that some other creditors of his have agreed to accept from him interest as far as Rhodes, and that it would be hard indeed if we should not make the same concession that they have made. And thirdly, besides all this, he declares that the agreement requires him to pay the money if the ship arrives safely, but that the ship has not arrived safely in the Peiraeus. To each of these arguments, men of the jury, hear the just answer that we make. [23]

  In the first place, when he says that the ship was disabled, I think it is plain to you all that he is lying. For if his ship had met with this mishap, she would neither have got safely to Rhodes nor have been fit for sailing afterwards. But in fact it is plain that she did get safe to Rhodes and was sent back from thence to Egypt, and that at the present time she is still sailing everywhere except to Athens. And yet is it not outrageous that, when he has to bring his ship back to the port of Athens, he says she was disabled, but when he wants to unlade his grain at Rhodes, then that same ship is seen to be seaworthy? [24]

  Why, then, he says, did I charter other ships and tranship my cargo and despatch it here to Athens? Because, men of Athens, neither the defendant nor his partner was owner of the entire cargo, but, I fancy, the supercargoes who were on board despatched their own goods hither, in other bottoms necessarily, seeing that these men had cut short the voyage before the ship reached her destination. As for the goods, however, which were their own, they did not ship these in their entirety to Athens, but sought out what ones had advanced in price. [25] For why, pray, was it that, when you had hired other bottoms, as you say, you did not tranship the entire cargo of your vessel, but left the grain there in Rhodes? Because, men of the jury, it was to their interest to sell the grain in Rhodes; for they heard that the price had fallen here in Athens, but they shipped to you the other goods, from which they hoped to make a profit. When, then, Dionysodorus, you talk about the chartering of the vessels, you give proof, not that your ship was disabled, but that it was to your advantage to do so. [26]

  Concerning these matters, then, what I have said is sufficient, but in regard to the creditors, who, they say, consented to accept from them the interest as far as Rhodes, this has nothing to do with us. If any man has remitted to you any part of what was due him, no wrong is suffered by either party to the arrangement. But we have not remitted anything to you, nor have we consented to your voyage to Rhodes, nor in our judgement is anything more binding than the agreement. [27] Now what does the agreement say, and to what port does it require you to sail? From Athens to Egypt and from Egypt to Athens; and in default of your so doing, it requires you to pay double the amount. If you have done this, you have committed no wrong; but if you have not done it, and have not brought your ship back to Athens, it is proper that you should suffer the penalty provided by
the agreement; for this requirement was imposed upon you, not by some other person, but by yourself. Show, then, to the jury one or the other of two things — that our agreement is not valid, or that you are not required to do everything in accordance with it. [28] If certain people have remitted anything in your favor, and have been induced on one ground or another to accept interest only as far as Rhodes, does it follow that you are doing no wrong to us, your agreement with whom you have broken in having your ship put into Rhodes? I do not think so. For this jury is not now deciding upon concessions made to you by others, but upon an agreement entered into by you yourself with us. For that the remission of the interest, supposing that it actually took place, as these men allege, was to the advantage of the creditors, is plain to every one of you. [29] For those who lent their money to these men for the outward voyage from Egypt to Athens, when they reached Rhodes and this man put into that port, suffered no loss, I take it, by remitting the interest and receiving the amount of their loan at Rhodes, and then putting the money to work again for a voyage to Egypt. No; this was more to their advantage than to continue the voyage to this port. [30] For voyaging from Rhodes to Egypt is uninterrupted, and they could put the same money to work two or three times, whereas here they would have had to pass the winter and to await the season for sailing. These creditors therefore have reaped an additional profit, and have not remitted anything to these men. With us, however, it is not a question of the interest merely, but we are unable to recover even our principal. [31]

  Do not, then, listen to him, when he seeks to hoodwink you, and brings before you his transactions with other creditors, but refer him to the agreement and to the rights growing out of it. It remains for me to interpret this matter for you, and the defendant insists upon this very thing, stating that the agreement requires him to repay the loan only if the ship arrives safe. We also maintain that this should be so. [32] But I should be glad to ask you yourself, Dionysodorus, whether you are speaking of the ship as having been lost, or as having arrived safe. For if the ship has been wrecked and is lost, why do you keep on disputing about the interest and demanding that we accept interest as far as Rhodes? For in that case we have not the right to recover either interest or principal. But if the ship is safe and has not been wrecked, why do you not pay us the money which you agreed to pay? [33] In what way, men of Athens, can you be most convincingly assured that the ship has reached port safe? In the first instance by the mere fact that she is now at sea, and less clearly by the statements made by these men themselves. For they ask us to accept payment of the principal and a certain portion of the interest, thus implying that the ship has reached port safe, but has not completed her entire voyage. [34] Now consider, men of Athens, whether it is we who are abiding by the requirements of the contract, or whether it is these men, who have sailed, not to the port agreed upon, but to Rhodes and Egypt, and who, when the ship has reached port safe and has not been lost, claim to be entitled to an abatement of the interest, although they have broken the agreement, and have themselves made a large profit by the carrying of grain to Rhodes, and by keeping and making use of our money for two years. [35] What they are doing is indeed an unheard-of thing. They offer to pay us the principal of our loan, thus implying that the ship has reached port safe, but they claim the right to rob us of our interest on the ground that she has been wrecked. The agreement, however, does not say one thing about the interest and another about the principal of the loan, but our rights are the same for both and our means of recovery the same. [36]

  Please read the agreement again.”Agreement

  From Athens to Egypt and from Egypt to Athens.”

  You hear, men of Athens. It says “From Athens to Egypt and from Egypt to Athens.”

  Read the rest.”Agreement

  And if the ship arrives safe at Peiraeus . . .” [37]

  Men of Athens, it is a very simple thing for you to reach a decision in this suit, and there is no need of many words. That the ship has reached port safe, and is safe, is admitted by these men themselves; for otherwise they would not be offering to pay the principal of the loan and a portion of the interest. She has not, however, been brought back to the Peiraeus. It is for this reason that we, the creditors, claim that we have been wronged, and regarding this we are bringing suit, that, namely she did not make the return voyage to the port agreed upon. [38] Dionysodorus, however, claims that he is doing no wrong because of this very fact, since he is not bound to pay the interest in its entirety inasmuch as the ship did not complete her voyage to Peiraeus. But what does the agreement say? By Zeus it is not at all what you say, Dionysodorus. No; it declares that if you do not pay both the principal and interest, or if you fail to present the security, plain to see and unimpaired, or if in any other respect you violate the agreement, you are required to pay double the amount.

  Read, please, that clause of the agreement.”Statement

  And if they shall not produce the security, plain to see and unimpaired, or if in any respect they shall violate the agreement, they shall pay double the amount.” [39]

  Have you, then, at any place whatever produced the ship plain to see since the time you received the money from us? And yet you yourself admit that she is safe. Or have you ever since that time brought her back to the port of Athens, though the agreement expressly stipulates that you shall bring your ship back to the Peiraeus, and produce her plain to see before the lenders? [40] This is an important point, men of Athens. Just observe the extravagance of his statement. The ship was disabled, so he says, and for this reason he brought her into the port of Rhodes. Well, then, after that she was repaired and became fit for sea. Why, then, my good fellow, did you send her off to Egypt and to other ports, but have never up to this day sent her back to Athens, to us your creditors, to whom the agreement requires you to produce the ship, plain to see and unimpaired, and that too although we made demand upon you again and again and challenged you to do so? [41] No; you are so bold or rather so impudent, that, while under the agreement you owe us double the amount of our loan, you do not see fit to pay us even the accrued interest, but bid us accept interest as far as Rhodes, as if your command ought to prove of more force than the agreement; and you have the insolence to declare that the vessel did not arrive safe at the Peiraeus; for which you might with justice be condemned to death by the jurors. [42] For who other than this fellow is to blame, men of the jury, if the ship did not arrive safe at the Peiraeus? Are we to blame, who lent our money expressly for a voyage to Egypt and to Athens, or is it the fault of this fellow and his partner, who after borrowing money on these terms, that the vessel should return to Athens, then took her to Rhodes? And that they did this of their own will and not of necessity is clear on many grounds. [43] For if what occurred took place against their will, and the ship was really disabled, afterwards, when they had repaired the ship, they would surely not have let her for a voyage to other ports, but would have despatched her to Athens to make amends for the involuntary accident. As it is, however, they have not only made no amends, but to their original wrongdoings they have added others greater far, and have come here to contest the suit as it were in a spirit of mockery, assuming that it will rest with them, if you give judgement against them, merely to pay the principal and interest. [44] Do not you, then, men of Athens, suffer men of this stamp to have their own way, nor allow them to ride on two anchors, with the hope that, if they are successful, they will retain what belongs to others, and if they are not able to hoodwink you, they will merely pay the bare amount which they owe; but inflict upon them the penalties provided in the agreement. For it would be an outrageous thing, when these men have themselves in writing imposed upon themselves a penalty of double the amount, if they commit any breach of the agreement, that you should be more lenient toward them; especially when you have yourselves been wronged no less than we. [45]

  Our claims in the matter, therefore, are few and easy to be remembered. We lent this fellow Dionysodorus and his partner three thousand drac
hmae for a voyage from Athens to Egypt and from Egypt to Athens; we have not received either principal or interest, but they have kept our money and had the use of it for two years; they have not even to this day brought the ship back to your port, nor produced it plain to see. The agreement, however, declares, that if they fail to deliver up the ship plain to see they shall pay double the amount, and that the money may be recovered from either one or both of them. [46] These are the just claims with which we have come before you demanding to recover our money through your help, since we cannot get it from these men themselves. Such is the statement of our case. These men, however, while they admit that they borrowed the money and have not paid it back, contend that they are not bound to pay the interest stipulated in the agreement, but the interest as far as Rhodes only, which they made no part of their contract, and to which we have not consented. [47] Perhaps, men of Athens, if we were trying the case in a Rhodian court, these men might get the better of us, seeing that they have taken grain to Rhodes and sailed in their ship into that port; as it is, however, since we have come before Athenians and our contract called for a voyage to your port, we hold it right that you should give no advantage to men who have wronged you as well as ourselves. [48]