Delphi Complete Works of Demosthenes

by Demosthenes

  [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] εἶτα καὶ πόση μωρία, λέγονθ᾽ ὡς ἐπεβούλευον ἀτιμῶσαι καὶ τὰ ἔσχατα πρᾶξαι, οἰκέτῃ με ταῦτα προστάξαι γεγραφέναι, ἃ οὐδὲ πολίτης πολίτην δύναιτ᾽ ἂν ποιῆσαι; τί οὖν ἐστι τοῦτο; οὐκ ἔχων οἶμαι κατ᾽ οὐδὲν διὰ τὴν ἀποδημίαν εἰς ἐμὲ τούτων ἀνενεγκεῖν τι, συκοφαντεῖν δὲ βουλόμενος, ὡς προσέταξα, ἐνέγραψεν: οὐδὲ γὰρ λόγος ἦν, εἰ μὴ τοῦτ᾽ ἐποίησε.

  [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] λέγε τἀκόλουθον.”Ἔγκλημα

  καὶ ἐπειδὴ ὦφλον ἐγὼ τῷ δημοσίῳ, καταστήσας Ἀντιγένην τὸν ἑαυτοῦ οἰκέτην εἰς τὸ ἐργαστήριον τὸ ἐμὸν τὸ ἐπὶ Θρασύλλῳ κύριον τῶν ἐμῶν, ἀπαγορεύοντος ἐμοῦ.”

  ἐπίσχες. πάλιν ταυτὶ πάνθ᾽ ὑπ᾽ αὐτοῦ τοῦ πράγματος ἐξελεγχθήσεται ψευδόμενος. γέγραφεν γὰρ καταστῆσαι μὲν ἐμέ, ἀπαγορεύειν δ᾽ αὑτόν. ταῦτα δ᾽ οὐχ οἷόν τε τὸν μὴ παρόντα. οὔτε γὰρ καθίστην ἐγώ, ὅ γ᾽ ὢν ἐν τῷ Πόντῳ, οὔτ᾽ ἀπηγόρευεν οὗτος τῷ μὴ παρόντι: πῶς γάρ;

  [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] πῶς οὖν εἰς ἀνάγκην ἦλθεν ταῦθ᾽ οὕτω γράψαι; ὁ Εὔεργος τότ᾽ οἶμαι πλημμελῶν ὧν δέδωκε δίκην, συνήθως ἔχων ἐμοὶ καὶ γνώριμος ὢν κατέστησεν τὸν οἰκέτην οἴκοθεν λαβὼν παρ᾽ ἐμοῦ φυλάττειν ὡς αὑτόν. εἰ μὲν οὖν ἔγραψε τἀληθές, γέλως ἂν ἦν: τί γάρ, εἰ κατέστησεν Εὔεργος, ἐγώ σ᾽ ἀδικῶ; φεύγων δὲ τοῦτο τοιαῦτ᾽ ἠνάγκασται γράφειν, ἵν᾽ ᾖ πρὸς ἔμ᾽ αὐτῷ τὸ ἔγκλημα. λέγε τὰ ἐφεξῆς.”Ἔγκλημα

  κἄπειτα πείσας τοὺς οἰκέτας τοὺς ἐμοὺς καθέζεσθαι εἰς τὸν κεγχρεῶνα ἐπὶ βλάβῃ τῇ ἐμῇ.”

  [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] τουτὶ παντελῶς ἤδη καὶ ἀναιδές ἐστιν: οὐ γὰρ μόνον ἐκ τοῦ προκαλεῖσθαι τούτους παραδοῦναι, τοῦτον δὲ μὴ ‘θέλειν, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἐκ πάντων δῆλόν ἐστιν ψεῦδος ὄν. τίνος γὰρ εἵνεκ᾽ ἔπειθον; ἵνα νὴ Δί᾽ αὐτοὺς κτήσωμαι. ἀλλ᾽ αἱρέσεώς μοι δοθείσης ἢ ἔχειν ἢ κομίσασθαι τὰ ἐμαυτοῦ, εἱλόμην κομίσασθαι, καὶ ταῦτα μεμαρτύρηται. λέγε δὴ τὴν πρόκλησιν ὅμως.”Πρόκλησις”

  [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] ταύτην τοίνυν οὐχὶ δεξάμενος τὴν πρόκλησιν, ἀλλὰ φυγών, σκέψασθ᾽ οἷον εὐθέως μετὰ ταῦτ᾽ ἐγκαλεῖ. λέγε τοὐχόμενον.”Ἔγκλημα

  καὶ κατεργασάμενος τὴν ἀργυρῖτιν, ἣν οἱ ἐμοὶ οἰκέται ἠργάσαντο, καὶ ἔχων τὸ ἀργύριον τὸ ἐκ ταύτης τῆς ἀργυρίτιδος.”

  πάλιν ταῦτα πῶς ἔνεστ᾽ ἐμοὶ πεπρᾶχθαι τῷ μὴ παρόντι,καὶ περὶ ὧν Εὐέργου κατεδικάσω;

  [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] λέγε δ᾽ αὐτοῖς τὸ ἐφεξῆς.”Ἔγκλημα

  καὶ ἀποδόμενος τὸ ἐργαστήριον τὸ ἐμὸν καὶ τοὺς οἰκέτας παρὰ τὰς συνθήκας, ἃς ἔθετο πρός με.”

  ἐπίσχες. τουτὶ πολὺ πάνθ᾽ ὑπερβέβληκεν τἄλλα. πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ παρὰ τὰς συνθήκας φησίν, ἃς ἔθετο πρὸς ἐμέ. αὗται δ᾽ εἰσὶ τίνες; ἐμισθώσαμεν τῶν τόκων τῶν γιγνομένων τούτῳ τὰ ἡμέτερ᾽ ἡμεῖς, καὶ ἄλλ᾽ οὐδέν: πρατὴρ μὲν γὰρ ὁ Μνησικλῆς ἡμῖν ἐγεγόνει τούτου παρόντος καὶ κελεύοντος.

  [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.

  [3
0] μετὰ ταῦτα δὲ τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον ἡμεῖς ἑτέροις ἀπεδόμεθα, ἐφ᾽ οἷσπερ αὐτοὶ ἐπριάμεθα, οὐ μόνον κελεύοντος ἔτι τούτου, ἀλλὰ καὶ ἱκετεύοντος: οὐδεὶς γὰρ ἤθελεν δέχεσθαι τοῦτον πρατῆρα. τί οὖν αἱ τῆς μισθώσεως ἐνταῦθα συνθῆκαι; τί τοῦτ᾽, ὦ φαυλότατ᾽ ἀνθρώπων, ἐνέγραψας; ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι σοῦ κελεύοντος καὶ ἐφ᾽ οἷσπερ ἐωνήμεθ᾽ αὐτοὶ πάλιν ἀπεδόμεθα, λέγε τὴν μαρτυρίαν.”Μαρτυρία”

  [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] μαρτυρεῖς τοίνυν καὶ σύ: ἃ γὰρ ἡμεῖς πέντε καὶ ἑκατὸν μνῶν ἐωνήμεθα, ταῦθ᾽ ὕστερον τριῶν ταλάντων καὶ δισχιλίων καὶ ἑξακοσίων ἀπέδου σύ: καίτοι τίς ἂν καθάπαξ πρατῆρά σ᾽ ἔχων σοὶ δραχμὴν ἔδωκε μίαν; ἀλλὰ μὴν ὅτι ταῦτ᾽ ἀληθῆ λέγω, κάλει μοι τούτων τοὺς μάρτυρας.”Μάρτυρες”

  [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] ἔχων μὲν τοίνυν ἣν ἐπείσθη τῶν αὑτοῦ τιμήν, δεηθεὶς δ᾽ ἐμοῦ τὸ γενέσθαι πρατῆρα καθ᾽ ὃ συνέβαλον ἀργύριον, αὑτὸς δυοῖν ταλάντοιν προσδικάζεται. καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν ἐγκλημάτων ἔτ᾽ ἐστὶ δεινότερα. λέγε δή μοι τὸ λοιπὸν τοῦ ἐγκλήματος.”Ἔγκλημα”

  [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] ἐνταυθὶ πόλλ᾽ ἄττα καὶ δεινά μοι ἅμ᾽ ἐγκαλεῖ: καὶ γὰρ αἴκειαν καὶ ὕβριν καὶ βιαίων καὶ πρὸς ἐπικλήρους ἀδικήματα. τούτων δ᾽ εἰσὶν ἑκάστου χωρὶς αἱ δίκαι καὶ οὔτε πρὸς ἀρχὴν τὴν αὐτὴν οὔθ᾽ ὑπὲρ τιμημάτων τῶν αὐτῶν, ἀλλ᾽ ἡ μὲν αἴκεια καὶ τὰ τῶν βιαίων πρὸς τοὺς τετταράκοντα, αἱ δὲ τῆς ὕβρεως πρὸς τοὺς θεσμοθέτας, ὅσα δ᾽ εἰς ἐπικλήρους, πρὸς τὸν ἄρχοντα. οἱ δὲ νόμοι καὶ τούτων διδόασι τὰς παραγραφὰς ἀντιλαγχάνειν, περὶ ὧν οὐκ εἰσὶν εἰσαγωγεῖς. λέγε δ᾽ αὐτοῖς τουτονὶ τὸν νόμον.”Νόμος”

  [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] τοῦτο τοίνυν ἐμοῦ παραγεγραμμένου πρὸς τῇ ἄλλῃ παραγραφῇ, ‘καὶ οὐκ ὄντων εἰσαγωγέων τῶν θεσμοθετῶν ὑπὲρ ὧν λαγχάνει Πανταίνετος,’ ἐξαλήλιπται καὶ οὐ πρόσεστι τῇ παραγραφῇ. τὸ δ᾽ ὅπως, ὑμεῖς σκοπεῖτε: ἐμοὶ μὲν γάρ, ἕως ἂν ἔχω τὸν νόμον αὐτὸν δεικνύναι, οὐδ᾽ ὁτιοῦν διαφέρει: οὐ γὰρ τὸ γιγνώσκειν καὶ συνιέναι τὰ δίκαι᾽ ὑμῶν ἐξαλεῖψαι δυνήσεται.

  [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] λαβὲ δὴ καὶ τὸν μεταλλικὸν νόμον: καὶ γὰρ ἐκ τούτου δείξειν οἴομαι, οὔτ᾽ οὖσαν εἰσαγώγιμον τὴν δίκην, χάριτός τ᾽ ὢν μᾶλλον ἄξιος ἢ τοῦ συκοφαντεῖσθαι. λέγε.”Νόμος”

  οὗτος σαφῶς ὁ νόμος διείρηκεν ὧν εἶναι δίκας προσήκει μεταλλικάς. οὐκοῦν ὁ μὲν νόμος, ἐάν τις ἐξίλλῃ τινὰ τῆς ἐργασίας, ὑπόδικον ποιεῖ: ἐγὼ δ᾽ οὐχ ὅπως αὐτὸς ἐξίλλω, ἀλλ᾽ ὧν τοῦτον ἄλλος ἀπεστέρει, τούτων ἐγκρατῆ κατέστησα καὶ παρέδωκα, καὶ πρατὴρ τούτου δεηθέντος ἐγενόμην.

  [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] ναί, φησίν: ἀλλὰ κἂν ἄλλο τι ἀδικῇ τις περὶ τὰ μέταλλα, καὶ τούτων εἰσὶν δίκαι. ὀρθῶς γ᾽, ὦ Πανταίνετε: ἀλλὰ ταῦτα τί ἐστιν; ἂν τύφῃ τις, ἂν ὅπλ᾽ ἐπιφέρῃ, ἂν ἐπικατατέμνῃ τῶν μέτρων ἐντός. ταῦτ᾽ ἐστὶν τἄλλα, ὧν οὐδὲν δήπου πέπρακται πρὸς ὑμᾶς ἐμοί, πλὴν εἰ τοὺς κομιζομένους ἃ προεῖντό σοι, μεθ᾽ ὅπλων ἥκειν νομίζεις. εἰ δὲ ταῦθ᾽ ἡγεῖ, πρὸς ἅπαντας τοὺς προϊεμένους τὰ ἑαυτῶν εἰσί σοι δίκαι μεταλλικαί.

  [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] ἀλλ�
� οὐ δίκαιον. φέρε γάρ, ὅστις ἂν μέταλλον παρὰ τῆς πόλεως πρίηται, τοὺς κοινοὺς παρελθὼν νόμους, καθ᾽ οὓς καὶ διδόναι καὶ λαμβάνειν πᾶσι προσήκει δίκας, ἐν ταῖς μεταλλικαῖς δικάσεται, ἐὰν δανείσηται παρά του; τί δ᾽, ἂν κακῶς ἀκούσῃ; ἂν πληγὰς λάβῃ; ἂν κλοπὴν ἐγκαλῇ;

  [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] ἂν προεισφορὰν μὴ κομίζηται; ἂν ὅλως ἄλλο τι; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἴομαι, ἀλλὰ τὰς μεταλλικὰς εἶναι δίκας τοῖς κοινωνοῦσι μετάλλου καὶ τοῖς ἕτερον συντρήσασιν εἰς τὰ τῶν πλησίον καὶ ὅλως τοῖς ἐργαζομένοις τὰ μέταλλα καὶ τῶν ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τι ποιοῦσιν, τῷ δὲ δανείσαντι Πανταινέτῳ, καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἀπειληφότι γλίσχρως καὶ μόλις παρὰ τούτου, οὐκ εἶναι δίκην μεταλλικὴν πρὸς φευκτέον, οὐδ᾽ ἐγγύς.