[12]
And as this is the case, I ask you why you made an agreement to abide
by arbitration in a matter involving this sum, this very fifty thousand sesterces, and the credit of your own account-books? why you
admitted an arbitrator in such a case to decide what it was right and proper should be
paid to you; or secured to you by bond, if it so seemed good to him? Who was the
arbitrator in this matter? I wish he were at Rome. He is at Rome. I wish he
were in court. He is. I wish he were sitting as assessor to Caius Piso. He is Caius Piso himself. Did you take the same
man for both arbitrator, and judge? Did you permit to the same man unlimited liberty of
varying his decision, and also limit him to the strictest formula of the bond? Who ever
went before an arbitrator and got all that he demanded? No one; for he only got all that
it was just should be given him. You have come before a judge for the very same sum for
which you had recourse to an arbiter.
This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
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.