[69]
Now there are some
facts about the information laid against him which Lycurgus seems to have passed
over, but which I had better lay before you; for I think you should examine the
defendant and the rights of the present case as carefully as you would
scrutinize a private debt. Suppose then that A accused B of owing him money, and
B denied it. If the registered terms of the loan were still to be read, or if
the pillars which marked the mortgaged property were still standing, you would
clearly regard as impudent the man who denied the transaction; but if it was
shown that these proofs no longer existed, then you would regard the accuser as
impudent. That is natural.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.