by Demosthenes
[7] They declare that they did not sell their father’s estate for the money which they received, nor did they give up the property, but that all that was left them — credits, furniture, and even money — still belongs to them. I, for my part, know by hearsay that Xenopeithes and Nausicrates left their entire property in outstanding debts, and possessed very little tangible property; and that when the debts had been collected and some furniture and slaves had been sold, their guardians purchased the farms and lodging-houses, which our opponents received from them.
[8] εἰ μὲν οὖν μηδὲν ἠμφεσβητήθη περὶ τούτων πρότερον, μηδ᾽ ὡς οὐ καλῶς διῳκημένων εἰς δίκην ἦλθεν, ἄλλος ἂν ἦν λόγος: ἐπειδὴ δ᾽ ὅλην τὴν ἐπιτροπὴν ἐγκαλέσαντες οὗτοι καὶ δίκας λαχόντες χρήματ᾽ ἐπράξαντο, πάντα ταῦτ᾽ ἀφεῖται τότε. οὔτε γὰρ οὗτοι τοὐνόματος δήπου τοῦ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς τὰς δίκας ἐδίωκον, ἀλλὰ τῶν χρημάτων, οὔτ᾽ ἐκεῖνοι τοὔνομα τοῦτ᾽ ἐωνοῦνθ᾽ ὧν ἀπέτεισαν χρημάτων, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἐγκλήματα.
[8] If there had been no dispute about these matters before, and no suit had been entered charging maladministration of the property, it would have been another story; but since these men brought suit against our father in the matter of his general conduct as guardian and recovered damages, all these matters were at that time released. For our opponents, I take it, did not bring suit for the mere name “mal-administration in guardianship,” but for the money; nor did the guardians buy off this name with the money which they paid, but they bought off the claims.
[9] ὅτι μὲν οὖν ὧν πρὸ τῶν ἀπαλλαγῶν εἰσέπραξεν χρεῶν ὁ πατὴρ ἢ ὅλως ἔλαβεν χρημάτων ἐκ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς, οὐδενός εἰσιν δίκαι τούτοις καθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἀπηλλαγμένοις, ἐξ αὐτῶν τῶν νόμων καὶ τῆς ἀφέσεως ἱκανῶς πάντας ἡγοῦμαι ὑμᾶς μεμαθηκέναι. ὅτι δ᾽ ὕστερον οὐκ ἔνι τὴν κομιδὴν γεγενῆσθαι τούτων τῶν χρημάτων （τοῦτο γὰρ πλάττουσιν οὗτοι καὶ παράγουσιν）, τοῦτο βούλομαι δεῖξαι.
[9] That, therefore, these men have no right of action against us for the debts which our father collected before the settlement, or, in general, for monies which he received by virtue of his guardianship, seeing that they have given a release for their claims, I think you have all adequately learned from the laws themselves and from the release. Moreover, that it is impossible that the collection of these funds should have been made subsequently （this is the story they are making up to lead you astray）, I wish to prove.
[10] τὸν μὲν γὰρ πατέρ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἂν αἰτιάσαιντο λαβεῖν （τέτταρσι γὰρ ἢ τρισὶ μησὶν ὕστερον ἢ διελύσατο πρὸς τούτους ἐτελεύτησεν）. ὡς δ᾽ οὐδὲ Δημάρετον τὸν καταλειφθένθ᾽ ἡμῶν ἐπίτροπον λαβεῖν οἷόν τε （καὶ γὰρ τοῦτον ἔγραψαν εἰς τὸ ἔγκλημα）, καὶ τοῦτ᾽ ἐπιδείξω.
[10] As for my father, they cannot charge that he received them; for he died three or four months after the settlement was made with them; and that Demaretus, whom our father left as our guardian, could not have received them either （for they have written his name also in their complaint）, this, too, I shall show.
[11] μέγιστοι μὲν οὖν ἡμῖν εἰσιν οὗτοι μάρτυρες （οὐδαμοῦ γὰρ φανήσονται δίκην εἰληχότες ζῶντι τῷ Δημαρέτῳ）: οὐ μὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ τὸ πρᾶγμ᾽ ἄν τις αὐτὸ σκοπῶν καὶ θεωρῶν ἴδοι οὐ μόνον οὐχὶ λαβόντα, ἀλλ᾽ οὐδ᾽ ἐνὸν αὐτῷ λαβεῖν. ἦν μὲν γὰρ τὸ χρέως ἐν Βοσπόρῳ, ἀφίκετο δ᾽ οὐδεπώποτ᾽ εἰς τὸν τόπον τοῦτον ὁ Δημάρετος: πῶς οὖν εἰσέπραξεν; ἔπεμψεν νὴ Δί᾽, εἴποι τις ἄν, τὸν κομιούμενον.
[11] These men are themselves our strongest witnesses; for they will be shown never to have brought suit against Demaretus in his lifetime; but, more than that, anyone who examines and studies the case itself will see, not only that he did not receive the money, but that it was impossible that he should have received it. For the debt was in Bosporus, a place which Demaretus never visited; how, then, could he have collected it? Ah, but, they will say, he sent someone to get the money.
[12] σκοπεῖτε δὴ τοῦθ᾽ οὑτωσί. ὤφειλεν Ἑρμῶναξ στατῆρας ἑκατὸν παρὰ Ναυσικράτους λαβὼν τούτοις. τούτων Ἀρίσταιχμος ἐπίτροπος καὶ κηδεμὼν ἐγένεθ᾽ ἑκκαίδεκ᾽ ἔτη. οὐκοῦν ἅ γε τούτων ἀνδρῶν γεγονότων δι᾽ ἑαυτοῦ διέλυε χρήμαθ᾽ ὁ Ἑρμῶναξ, οὐκ ἀπέδωκεν ὅτ᾽ ἦσαν παῖδες: οὐ γὰρ δίς γε ταὐτὰ κατετίθει. ἔστιν οὖν οὕτω τις ἀνθρώπων ἄτοπος, ὥσθ᾽ ἃ τοὺς κυρίους διεκρούσατο μὴ καταθεῖναι τοσοῦτον χρόνον, ταῦτα τῷ μὴ κυρίῳ πέμψαντι γράμμαθ᾽ ἑκὼν ἀποδοῦναι; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἶμαι.
[12] But look at the matter in this way. Hermonax owed these men one hundred staters, which he had received from Nausicrates. Aristaechmus was for sixteen years the guardian and caretaker of these men. Therefore, the money which Hermonax paid in his own person after these men had come of age, he had not paid when they were minors; for he certainly did not pay the same debt twice. Now is there any man so silly as voluntarily to pay money to one not entitled to it, who demanded it by letter, when he had for so long a time evaded payment to the rightful owners? For my part, I think there is not.
[13] ἀλλὰ μὴν ὡς ἀληθῆ λέγω, καὶ ὁ μὲν πατὴρ ἐτελεύτησεν εὐθέως μετὰ τὰς διαλύσεις, τῷ Δημαρέτῳ δ᾽ οὐδεπώποθ᾽ οὗτοι τούτων τῶν χρημάτων δίκην ἔλαχον, οὐδ᾽ ὅλως ἐξέπλευσεν ἐκεῖνος οὐδ᾽ ἀπεδήμησεν ἐκεῖσε, λαβὲ τὰς μαρτυρίας.”Μαρτυρίαι”
[13] However, to prove that I am speaking the truth, — that our father died immediately after the settlement, that these men never brought suit against Demaretus for this money, and that he absolutely never went to sea, nor visited Bosporus, take the depositions.” Depositions”
[14] ὅτι μὲν τοίνυν οὔθ᾽ ὁ πατὴρ μετὰ τὴν ἄφεσιν τὰ χρήματ᾽ εἰσέπραξεν, οὔτ᾽ ἂν ἔδωκεν ἑκὼν οὐδείς, εἴ τιν᾽ ἔπεμψεν ὁ Δημάρετος, οὔτ᾽ ἀνέπλευσεν αὐτὸς οὐδ᾽ ἀφίκετ᾽ ἐκεῖσε, δῆλον ἐκ τῶν χρόνων καὶ τῶν μαρτυριῶν ὑμῖν γέγονεν. βούλομαι τοίνυν καὶ ὅλως ψευδομένους αὐτοὺς ὅλον τὸ πρᾶγμ᾽ ἐπιδεῖξαι. οὗτοι γὰρ γεγράφασιν εἰς ὃ νῦν ἔγκλημα διώκουσιν, ὀφείλειν ἡμᾶς τὸ ἀργύριον κομισαμένου τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ παραδόντος αὐτοῖς τοῦτο τὸ χρέως ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς ὀφειλόμενον. καί μοι λέγ᾽ αὐτὸ τὸ ἔγκλημα λαβών.”Ἔγκλημα”
[14] Well then, that our father did not collect the money after the release; that no one would voluntarily have paid the money, if Demaretus had sent someone to get it; and that he himself neither put out to sea
nor visited Bosporus, has been made clear to you from the dates and the depositions. I wish, then, to show you that their whole statement too of the case is absolute falsehood. They have written in the complaint which they are now prosecuting, that we owe the money, inasmuch as our father received it in payment, and passed it over to them as a debt due and payable in his account of his guardianship.
Take, and read me, please, the complaint itself.” Complaint”
[15] ἀκούετε γεγραμμένον ἐν τῷ ἐγκλήματι ‘παραδόντος ἐμοὶ τοῦ Ἀρισταίχμου τὸ χρέως ἐν τῷ λόγῳ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς’. ὅτε τοίνυν ἐλάγχανον τῷ πατρὶ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς, τἀναντί᾽ ἐγράψαντο τούτων: ὡς γὰρ οὐκ ἀποδόντι λόγον τότ᾽ ἐγκαλοῦντες φαίνονται. λέγ᾽ αὐτὸ τὸ ἔγκλημα, ὃ τότ᾽ ἔλαχον τῷ πατρί.”Ἔγκλημα”
[15] You hear it stated in the complaint, “inasmuch as Aristaechmus passed the debt over to me in his account of his guardianship.” But, when they brought suit against my father in the matter of his guardianship, they wrote the very opposite of this; for they plainly charged him with not rendering an account.
Read, please, the complaint itself, which they then brought against my father.” Complaint”
[16] ἐν ποίῳ δὴ λόγῳ νῦν ἐγκαλεῖθ᾽ ὡς παρέδωκεν, ὦ Ξενοπείθη καὶ Ναυσίμαχε; τότε μὲν γὰρ ὡς οὐκ ἀποδόντι δίκας ἐλαγχάνετε καὶ χρήματ᾽ ἐπράττεσθε. εἰ δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἀμφότερ᾽ ἔσται συκοφαντεῖν ὑμῖν, καὶ τοτὲ μὲν τοῦ μὴ παραδοῦναι χρήματ᾽ ἐπράξασθε, τοτὲ δ᾽ ὡς παραδόντος διώκετε, οὐδὲν κωλύει καὶ τρίτον τι σκοπεῖν μετὰ ταῦτα, ὅτου πάλιν δικάσεσθε. οἱ νόμοι δ᾽ οὐ ταῦτα λέγουσιν, ἀλλ᾽ ἅπαξ περὶ τῶν αὐτῶν πρὸς τὸν αὐτὸν εἶναι τὰς δίκας.
[16] In what account, pray, Xenopeithes and Nausimachus, do you now charge that he passed the debt over to you? For at one time you brought suit and demanded money on the ground that he rendered no account. But if it is to be permitted you to bring your malicious charge on both grounds, and at one time you collected money because he did not hand something over to you, and at another are suing him on the ground that he did hand it over, there is nothing to prevent your looking for some third ground after this, so as to commence proceedings afresh. But that is not what the laws state: they declare that suit may be brought once only against the same person for the same acts.
[17] ἵνα τοίνυν εἰδῆτ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, ὅτι οὐ μόνον οὐκ ἀδικοῦνται νῦν, ἀλλὰ καὶ παρὰ πάντας ἡμῖν δικάζονται τοὺς νόμους, βούλομαι καὶ τοῦτον ὑμῖν τὸν νόμον εἰπεῖν, ὅστις διαρρήδην λέγει, ἐὰν πέντ᾽ ἔτη παρέλθῃ καὶ μὴ δικάσωνται, μηκέτ᾽ εἶναι τοῖς ὀρφανοῖς δίκην περὶ τῶν ἐκ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς ἐγκλημάτων. καὶ ὑμῖν ἀναγνώσεται τὸν νόμον.”Νόμος”
[17] Now, men of the jury, that you may know that they not only have suffered no wrong in the present case, but that they are bringing suit in defiance of all your laws, I wish to cite to you this statute also, which expressly states that, if five years have elapsed and they have brought no suit, it is no longer permitted to orphans to bring suit regarding claims connected with guardianship.
The clerk will read you this law.” Law”
[18] ἀκούετ᾽, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί, τοῦ νόμου λέγοντος ἄντικρυς, ἐὰν μὴ πέντ᾽ ἐτῶν δικάσωνται, μηκέτ᾽ εἶναι δίκην. οὐκοῦν ἐλάχομεν, φαῖεν ἄν. καὶ διελύσασθέ γε, ὥστ᾽ οὐκ εἰσὶν αὖθις ὑμῖν δίκαι. ἢ δεινόν γ᾽ ἂν εἴη, εἰ τῶν μὲν ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἀδικημάτων οὐ δίδωσιν ἔξω πέντ᾽ ἐτῶν τὰς δίκας τοῖς ὀρφανοῖς ὁ νόμος κατὰ τῶν οὐκ ἀφειμένων ἐπιτρόπων, πρὸς δὲ τοὺς ἐξ ἐκείνων ἡμᾶς, περὶ ὧν αὐτοὺς ἀφήκατε, εἰκοστῷ νῦν ἔτει δίκην τελέσαισθ᾽ ὑμεῖς.
[18] You hear the law, men of the jury, flatly stating that if they do not bring suit within five years, they have no longer the right to sue. But we did bring suit, they may say. Yes, and you made a settlement, too; so you have no right to bring a fresh suit. Else it would be an outrageous thing, if for original wrongdoings the law does not allow suit to be brought by orphans after five years against guardians who have not been released, but now in the twentieth year you are to maintain an action against us, the children of your guardians, for matters concerning which you did give them a release.
[19] ἀκούω τοίνυν αὐτοὺς τὰ μὲν περὶ τῶν πραγμάτων αὐτῶν καὶ τῶν νόμων δίκαια φεύξεσθαι, παρεσκευάσθαι δὲ λέγειν ὡς πολλὰ χρήματ᾽ αὐτοῖς κατελείφθη καὶ ταῦτ᾽ ἀπεστερήθησαν, καὶ τεκμηρίῳ χρήσεσθαι τούτου τῷ μεγέθει τῶν δικῶν ἃς ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἔλαχον, καὶ τὴν ὀρφανίαν ὀδυρεῖσθαι, καὶ τὸν τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς λόγον διεξιέναι: καὶ ταῦτ᾽ εἶναι καὶ τοιαῦθ᾽ οἷς πεπιστεύκασι καὶ δι᾽ ὧν ὑμᾶς ἐξαπατήσειν οἴονται.
[19] But I hear that they are going to shun arguments based upon the facts of the case and upon the laws, and are prepared to assert that a large estate was left them and that they were defrauded of it; and that they will advance as a proof of this the large sum asked as damages in their original suit, and they will wail over their orphanhood, and will go through the guardianship accounts. These and such-like points are the ones upon which they have fixed their trust, and by which they hope to beguile you.
[20] ἐγὼ δὲ τὸ μὲν τῶν δικῶν μέγεθος τῶν τότε ληχθεισῶν μεῖζον ἡγοῦμαι τεκμήριον ἡμῖν εἶναι ὡς ἐσυκοφαντεῖθ᾽ ὁ πατήρ, ἢ τούτοις ὡς πόλλ᾽ ἀπεστεροῦντο. ὀγδοήκοντα μὲν γὰρ τάλαντ᾽ ἔχων ἐξελέγχειν, οὐδὲ εἷς ἂν τρία λαβὼν ἀπηλλάγη: τοσούτων δὲ χρημάτων ἐπιτροπῆς φεύγων, οὐδεὶς ἔστιν ὅστις οὐκ ἂν ἔδωκεν τρία τάλαντα, τὸν κίνδυνον ὠνούμενος καὶ τὰ φύσει τότε τούτοις πλεονεκτήμαθ᾽ ὑπάρχοντα. καὶ γὰρ ὀρφανοὶ καὶ νέοι καὶ ὁποῖοί τινές εἰσιν ἀγνῶτες ἦσαν: ταῦτα δὲ πάντες φασὶν μεγάλων δικαίων ἰσχύειν πλέον παρ᾽ ὑμῖν.
[20] For my own part, I think that the large sum asked as damages in the suits then brought is a stronger proof for us, that our father was the victim of a malicious action, than for them, that they were being defrauded of a large estate. For if he could prove his claims for eighty talents, no man in the world would have accepted three talents in settlement; whereas anyone, being defendant in a guardianship suit involving such large sums, would have paid three talents to buy off the risk and the advantages with which at that time nature supplied these men. They were orphans and young, and you were ignorant of their real characters; and everyone says that in your courts these things have more weight than strong arguments.
[21] ὅτι τοίνυν οὐδ᾽ ἀνάσχοισθ᾽ ἂν αὐτῶν εἰκότως οὐδὲν περὶ τῆς ἐπιτροπῆς, κα�
�� τοῦτ᾽ οἴομαι δείξειν. εἰ γὰρ ὡς οἷόν τε μέγιστ᾽ ἠδικῆσθαι δοίη τις αὐτοῖς καὶ ἐρεῖν ἅπαντ᾽ ἀληθῆ περὶ τούτων νυνί, ἐκεῖνό γ᾽ οἶμαι πάντας ἂν ὑμᾶς ὁμολογῆσαι, ὅτι πολλὰ συμβέβηκεν ἠδικῆσθαί τισιν ἤδη μείζω τῶν εἰς χρήματα γιγνομένων ἀδικημάτων: καὶ γὰρ ἀκούσιοι φόνοι καὶ ὕβρεις εἰς ἃ μὴ δεῖ καὶ πολλὰ τοιαῦτ᾽ ἀδικήματα γίγνεται. ἀλλ᾽ ὅμως τούτων ἁπάντων ὅρος καὶ λύσις τοῖς παθοῦσιν τέτακται τὸ πεισθέντας ἀφεῖναι.
[21] Moreover, I think I can also prove that you might with good reason refuse to hear a word from them in regard to the guardianship. For suppose one should grant that they have suffered the greatest possible wrongs, and that everything which they will now allege about these matters is true, this, at least, I presume you would all admit: that it has happened to others ere now to have suffered many wrongs more serious than pecuniary wrongs. For involuntary homicides, outrages on what is sacred, and many other such crimes are committed; yet in all these cases the fact they have yielded to persuasion and given a release is appointed for the parties wronged as a limit and settlement of the dispute.