nearly four talents, of which they got immediate possession. Adding to this last sum the interest of ten years at the rate of twelve per cent. only, the whole, principal and interest together, makes (you will find) eight talents and ten minas. From the seventy-seven minas, proceeds of the manufactory, I must deduct the maintenance of the men, on whom (as I admit) Therippides spent seven minas a year. In ten years the maintenance comes to seventy minas, leaving a balance upon this account in my favour of seven minas; to which I forego my claim, and put down so much more to their credit than they themselves do. I must next deduct from the eight talents and odd the money which they handed over to me upon my coming of age, and that which they paid for property tax. The defendant and Therippides paid me thirty-one minas, and they charge me, for payments to the property tax, eighteen minas. I will be liberal to them, and set down this last sum at thirty minas, that I may leave no pretence for cavil. Subtracting then the one talent from the eight, there remain seven, for which (according to their own admissions) they must be liable; and therefore, though they dispute and cheat me out of everything else, they ought at least to pay me this sum, which they acknowledge to have received out of my estate. But what is it they do? They show me no return of interest for this money, and tell me they have spent all the principal, besides the seventy-seven minas; and Demophon has gone so far as to set me down as his debtor. Is not this plain and downright impudence? Is it not rapacity of the most atrocious description? I know not the meaning of atrocity, if conduct so outrageous falls not within the term. It is clear then, that the defendant, who confesses that he bas himself received a hundred and eight minas, is liable to me for these, and the interest upon them for ten years; making altogether about three talents and ten minas. To prove the truth of what I say that each of the guardians states in his account, that he received so much, but that he has spent it all-let us have the depositions read. [The Depositions.] I suppose, men of the jury, you are now fully enlightened as to these points, and see the frauds and thefts which each of these men has committed. The information however would have been more satisfactory, if they had chosen to give up my father's will, in which (as my mother says) he enumerated everything which he left, specified the fund out of which the guardians were to take their legacies, and directed the property to be let. They allow that there was a will, but refuse, on my request, to produce it, for fear of making known the amount of my father's property embezzled by them, and not wishing it to appear that they have received their legacies as though they are not sure to be convicted by the circumstances of the case. Read the evidence of the witnesses who depose to their answers.1 1 Each of the parties in a cause at Athens was at liberty to put questions to the other, and to insist on having them answered, both at the hearing before the magistrate and at the trial, though the latter was not so common. The answers given before the magistrate were taken down in writing, and afterwards produced in evidence, if thought expedient, verified by the depositions of witnesses who heard the answers given. Here Demosthenes produces the answer of Aphobus, which had been taken down before the Archon; he calls it Thν TOUTOU ἀπόκρισιν. It may be thought from the words ὧν ἀπεκρίναντο, the verb being in the plural, that answers of the colleagues are read also. I apprehend however that this is not so; but that depositions, not answers, of the colleagues are produced, and that the expression v TEKρívavтo is (in perfect strictness) applicable to Aphobus only. I say in perfect strictness, because in a loose and popular way of speaking anything which is said in reply to a question may be called an answer. But the distinction here is between the answer of a party in the cause and the evidence of a witness. We know that each of the guardians had-and perhaps it was necessary he should have a separate action brought against him. In such action his colleagues could not be treated in law as parties, notwithstanding the interest which they might have in the result; they could therefore only furnish evidence for or against either party in the regular way, by testimonial deposition and appearance in court to confirm it. (See Vol. iii. Appendix IX. pp. 381389.) Demosthenes compelled Demophon and Therippides to give evidence in this action, summoning them before the Archon, and taking the chance of what they would say. They made some admissions which were for his advantage, and therefore he put in their evidence, notwithstanding that it contained other statements to his disadvantage. We find him taking the same course in a suit against Demon, in which he called Aphobus as a witness, notwithstanding his hostility. (See Orat. cont. Aphob. III. 860, 861.) This point indeed does not rest upon conjecture. Speaking of the statement of Therippides, which is here put in, the orator says, ouros μapтupeî. Therippides was present, and μaprupeî is the term properly applicable to a testimonial deposition. [The Depositions.] This man, whose evidence you have just heard, declares that a will was made, and that the two talents were thereby given to Demophon, and the eighty minas to the defendant; but he denies that there was any mention of the seventy minas which Therippides received, or of the amount of property bequeathed, or a direction for the letting of it; for it is against his interest to admit these facts. Now read the answer of the defendant. [The Deposition.] The defendant says that the will was made, and that the money arising from the copper and the gall was paid to Therippides (which Therippides denies), and that the two talents were paid to Demophon; but, as to the legacy which was given to himself, though he admits it was mentioned in the will, he says he did not assent to it, in order that it may not appear to have been received by him. And he, as well as Therippides, says nothing as to the amount of property being stated in the will, or as to the letting clause; for it is against his interest too to make these admissions. The amount however is not the less apparent, though they will not suffer it to appear in the will, when they admit that such large sums were thereby given to one another. For if my father, out of four talents and thirty miuas, has given to two of these men three talents and twenty minas as marriage gifts, and to the other the interest of seventy minas, it is clear, I imagine, that he took these legacies not from a small property, but from a residue (bequeathed to me) of more than double their value. Surely he would not choose to leave me, his son, in poverty, and to heap wealth upon these men, who were wealthy enough already. No. It was because he had left me a very large estate, that he gave so handsome a legacy to Therippides, and the interest of the two talents to Demophon before the period of his marriage with my sister; for he Compare also Orat. cont. Aphob. II. 838, 839; and cont. Aphob. III. 854. I do not agree with Schäfer, as to the changing of Onpitídns to autós. There is an irony in the naming of the person, which seems to have escaped the notice of that acute critic. hoped to accomplish one of two purposes; either that by his bounty he might induce them to take better care of me, or (if they should turn out dishonest) that such gross ingratitude might exclude them from your mercy. And yet the defendant, who (besides my mother's portion) has taken the female servants and dwelt in the house, when the time comes to render an account of these matters, tells me he has enough to do to mind his own business. Nay, he is so grasping, that he has even cheated my instructors of their fees, and has not paid some of the property taxes, though he charges them to me. Take and read to the jury these depositions. [The Depositions.] Is there any way of showing more clearly, that the defendant has robbed me by wholesale without sparing the most trifling article? I have shown by numerous witnesses and proofs, that he admitted having received the marriage portion, and gave an acknowledgment thereof to the guardians; that he has received the income of the manufactory, and produces none; that of the other effects he has sold a part, and not paid over the proceeds, and the rest he has kept and concealed. By the account which he has rendered himself, I prove him guilty of large embezzlement; I show him also to have made away with the will, sold the slaves, and managed the whole estate in such a way, as not even my bitterest enemies would have done. I cannot conceive it possible to convict him more clearly. He dared to say before the arbitrator, that he had paid debts for me out of the estate to Demophon and Therippides, and that they got a good share of my property; but neither of these facts could he prove. He did not show by the ledger book that my father left me in debt; nor has he called in evidence the parties, whom he says he paid; nor is the money, for which he accounts by referring to his fellowguardians, equal in amount to his own receipts, but a good deal less. When the arbitrator questioned him upon these particulars, and asked him how he had managed his own estate, whether he lived upon the interest or spent the principal, and whether, if his guardians had served him so, he would have accepted of such an account from them, or have insisted upon having his money, principal and interest, paid; he gave no direct answer, but tendered me a challenge,' offering to prove my estate to be worth ten talents, and said, if it fell short, he would himself make up the difference. I bade him prove this to the arbitrator; but he could not; nor did he show that his colleagues had paid me; (if he had, the arbitrator would not have given an award against him ;) but he put in a piece of evidence, from which, in his address to you, he will endeavour to raise an argument." If now he shall still assert that I am possessed of so much property, ask him from whom I obtained it, and require him to prove every statement by witnesses. If he makes it out by reckoning what is due to me from his colleagues, he will only have accounted for a third part, and even this I shall not be shown to have received. I shall myself prove, that each of the other two owes me as much as the defendant. It will not avail him therefore to say this; he must show, that either he or his colleagues actually paid me; otherwise, how can you attend to his challenge, when at all events he gives no proof that I am possessed of the sum in question? Being at a loss to give any account of these matters before the arbitrator, and being convicted in every single point, as he now is before you, he ventured to tell a most wicked falsehood; that my father left me four talents buried under ground, and put my mother in charge of them. His intention was this-Either I should suppose he would repeat the story here, and so lose time in confuting it, when I ought to be proving other parts of my case; or I should pass it over as unlikely to be repeated, and then he would bring it forward, and I should get the less pity from you, for seeming to be rich. In support of this bold assertion, he put in no evidence, but fancied he should be believed on his bare word.3 And when any one asks him, upon what he has spent so much of my money, he says he has paid debts for me, and so far represents me as being poor; but again, when it suits 1 See Vol. iii. Appendix IX. p. 382. 2 He does not think it worth his while to mention what it was. Pabst―" er brachte ein gewisses Zeugniss bei, worüber er jetz Etwas zu sagen versuchen wird." I adopt the reading an' èkelvwv. A more literal translation of the sentence is-" And he put in no evidence of this assertion, he that dared to make it, relying on his bare word as if he would be believed by telling the story." |