ORATION XXXL.
AGAINST PHILON.
1. Until now I believed, gentlemen of the Boule, that Philon would not come to such a point of daring, as to bring himself to appear before you for examination; but as he is audacious, not in one thing but many, and I have come to the council-house after taking oath to legislate for the state in the best possible way, (2) and it is contained in the oath (that one should) declare it if he knows that a man chosen for office is not fit to consult for the state, I will make this accusation against this Philon here, not indeed because I follow up any private enmity, nor rising among you because I am able and accustomed to speak, but realizing (trusting in) the number of his crimes, and believing I must be faithful to the oaths I have taken. 3. You will know that I am not so well prepared to bring proof against him as he was (when) he entered on his course of crime. Yet if I should omit some point in the accusation, he ought not justly to benefit from this, but rather should be rejected on ground of whatever I prove satisfactorily. 4. For I shall speak insufficiently on account of my lack of acquaintance with all he has done, but adequately so far as the evil goes which attaches to him. But I beg you, as many of you as are better speakers than I, to declare that his sins are (even) greater, and out of what I leave unsaid you are to accuse Philon about what you yourselves know. For you should decide upon his character not alone from what I may say.
5. For I mean that it is not right for any to legislate for us, except those who besides being citizens are really interested in being such. For with such the difference is great between a prosperous and an unsuccessful condition of this state, because they think they must bear their share of evil as well as good. 6. But as many as are citizens by birth, but believe that the whole earth is their country in which they have property, it is evident that these would disregard the common welfare of the state, and turn their attention to their personal advantage, because they consider not the state, but their property their country. 7. So I will show that this Philon has cared more for his personal safety than for the common danger of the commonwealth, and that he thinks it better for him to live his life without danger than for the state to be in safety, even while endangering other citizens.
8. When misfortune came to the state, members of the Boule,—I will mention this only as far as is necessary,—this man was drafted from the city by the Thirty with the rest of the citizens and for a time lived outside, but when the party from Phyle marched on the Piraeus, and men from the country as well as those in exile joined forces either in the town or at the Piraeus, and brought what aid each could to his country, this man took just the opposite course from the rest of the citizens. 9. For he packed up his possessions and went into a country not his own, and paid the alien's tax in Oropos and lived under a patron, preferring to be an alien there rather than be a citizen with us. Then, not like some of the citizens who changed parties when they saw the men from Phyle were successful in their attempts, did he claim to share in their successes, but he wished to come after all was over rather than come with them and unite in what was for the common advantage of the state. For he did not come to the Piraeus, nor offer himself to you to be appointed for military duty. 10. And while he dared betray us in our success, what would he have done, if we had been unsuccessful? Those who did not share in the risk to the state through some personal misfortune, should be excused, for such failure is involuntary; (11) but those who pursued this course of action on purpose are not to be pardoned, for they did so, not through misfortune but by design. And it is agreed by all men that for the same trespasses we should be most of all angry at those who are perfectly able not to commit a wrong, but excuse those who are poor or infirm, because we consider they sin involuntarily. 12. But this man should have no excuse; for he is neither a cripple and so unable to work, as you see, nor (unable) to contribute money as if poor, as I shall show. How should not a man be hated with reason by you if he put the same energy into being wicked that he might have used aiding you? 13. And you will not incur the hatred of any of the citizens by rejecting this man; for he evidently betrayed not one party, but both, so that it appears he is not liked either by the city party,—for he did not consent to go into danger with them—nor by those who took the Piraeus,—for he would not move with them. 14. If then any of the citizens are left over who had the same experiences as his, let him claim to legislate in their company, if they ever,—which Heaven forbid,—take the state.
So that he took up his residence in Oropos under a patron and gained sufficient property, and neither took arms in the town nor in the Piraeus, that you may know that these first things which I affirm are true, hear the witnesses.
WITNESSES.
15. Then it remains for him to say that he was incapacitated through some weakness of body from helping against the Piraeus, but that he offered from his resources either to give money to the majority of you or to arm some of his fellow-citizens, just as other citizens (do) who are unable to serve personally. 16. That it may not be possible for him to deceive us by lying, I will show you plainly about this too, since it will not be possible for me afterwards to convict him, if I pass this by. Now call for me Diotimus of Acharnae, and those chosen with him to arm the citizens from the money contributed.
EVIDENCE or THOSE CHOSEN WITH DIOTIMUS.
17. This man then did not think how he might benefit the state in so critical a condition of the state, but made every preparation to make some gain from your misfortunes. For he started at Oropos at one time by himself, and at another at the head of men to whom your bad fortune was a series of benefits, (18) and went about through, the country and met the older citizens who remained in their demes with few possessions, and those the bare necessities, men who were in sympathy with the government, but were incapacitated for active service on account of their age, and he robbed these men of their goods and thought nothing of wronging them if he could gain even a little. These men are now unable to prosecute him for the very reason which kept them from aiding the state then. 19. So it is not right that he should gain advantage twice from their inability, once when he robbed them of their possessions, and now while under examination at your hands. But if any one of those wronged shall come, consider it a great point, and feel the greatest hatred for this man, who dared to rob of their goods the very men whom other men through pity have chosen as objects of charity. Call me the witnesses.
WITNESSES.
20. I do not know why you should feel differently about him from his relatives. For (their feelings) are such that if he had done no other wrong, it would be right to refuse him the examination on account of them alone. I will pass over the accusations which his mother made during her life. It is easy for you to infer from what she did at the close of her life, how her son conducted himself towards her. 21. For she did not dare trust herself to him at death, but gave to Antiphanes who was not a relative, but whom she trusted, three minae of silver for her burial, disregarding her own son. So is it not evident that she knew well that he would not do his duty even to a relative? 22. Then if a mother, who naturally endures the wrongs put upon her by her children and thinks she has great returns from them even if they render only a slight service, because she judges what happens rather by her natural mother-love than by any cold-blooded standard, (if she then) thought her son would rob her at death, what should be your judgment about him? 23. For what would a man do to those who were not connected with him if lie commits such offenses against his own relatives? That this is true, hear the man who took the silver and buried her.
EVIDENCE.
24. How then could you allow him to pass? As if he had done no wrong? But he has been guilty of the greatest offenses against his country. That he will improve? Then let him improve first and afterwards go into political life; after he has done something as manifestly good as his evil deeds were bad in the past. It is more prudent to show gratitude for all his deeds, for it seems to me a dreadful thing if he shall escape punishment for his past offenses and be rewarded for his good intentions. 25. But perhaps he should be examined that the citizens may be nobler if they see all honored alike! But there is danger that if the good see the bad held in equal honor they will cease from their upright mode of life, thinking it is the same thing to honor bad men and pass by the good. 26. But this is to be remembered, that if any one betrays a stronghold or ships or a camp, in which there chance to be any citizens, he receives the extreme penalty, while this man who betrayed the whole city is planning not for punishment but for reward. So one who betrayed freedom as evidently as this man did would justly be contending not for political office, but against slavery and the greatest penalties.
27. But I hear that he says that if it was wrong that lie was not at hand at that time, that a law would have expressly stated it, as about other transgressions, For he does not think you will know that no law was written about it on account of the enormity of the offense. For what statesman ever thought of such a thing, or what lawgiver ever supposed a citizen would commit such an offense? 28. For I suppose we are to think if a man left the ranks not while his country was in danger, but while she was acting on the offensive, that a law would be framed which condemned him as guilty, but if he left the ranks while his country was in danger, the law would not be framed. The fact is that such a law would have been made, if any one had supposed that a citizen would commit such a deed. 29. But who would not justly blame you if you reward the metics for aiding the state as they were expected to, but do not punish this man for betraying the state contrary to what was expected of him, if not by some greater penalty, at least by the present dishonor? 30. But call to mind the reasons which lead you to honor those men who were brave in relation to the city and to punish those who were not. For both these lines of conduct were followed as a sort of warning, not so much for the past as for the future, that men may become good for some good reason, and by no means attempt to be bad. 31. And besides, think how this man would probably regard his oaths, if he actually betrayed his country's gods. Or how would he make any useful law for the constitution, if he wished his country to be deprived of her freedom? Or how would he keep secret engagements, if he thought it right to disregard the regularly appointed ones? How can it be probable that this man who never entered danger even behind others, should be foremost in action and so now be worthy of honor? But it would be a shame, if he cared nothing for all the citizens while he is the one man whom you do not reject.
32. But I see some who now are in readiness to help him and beseech you, since they cannot persuade you; but then, when yours were the dangers and struggle and the prize was the democracy, and when you had to take counsel not merely for legislation, but for freedom, then they did not ask him to aid you and the commonwealth, and not betray the country and the senate in which he now claims a seat, though he has no share in it since others did the work. 33. Members of the Boule, he should not be angry if he does not obtain this honor; for it is not you who dishonor him, but he robbed himself at the time when he did not think it best to establish himself among you as if contending for the senate as zealously as he now comes as a candidate.
34. I think I have said enough, though leaving much unsaid. But I trust that you yourselves will know without anything more what is for the interest of the state. For you need not take any evidence but your own about those who are worthy to legislate, as many of you as have passed the examination for the state. For his conduct is an unprecedented warning and contrary to all democracy.