§31ἀλλὰ μὴν καὶ ὡς ἀπηγόρευεν ὁ Παρμένων τῷ Ἀριστοκλεῖ καθʼ αὑτοῦ μὴ γιγνώσκειν ἄνευ τῶν συνδιαιτητῶν, μεμαρτύρηται ὑμῖν.
Furthermore, that Parmenon forbade Aristocles to make a decision against him without his co-arbitrators has been testified to you.
ὅταν δὴ ὁ αὐτὸς ἠφανικὼς φαίνηται τὰ γράμματα καθʼ ἃ ἔδει τὴν δίαιταν γενέσθαι, καὶ ἄνευ τῶν συνδιαιτητῶν παρὰ τὴν ἀπόρρησιν φῇ δεδιῃτηκέναι, πῶς ἂν τούτῳ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ πιστεύσαντες δικαίως ἐμὲ ἀπολέσαιτε;
When, therefore, the same man appears to have made the document disappear under which the arbitration was to take place, and claims to have arbitrated without the co-arbitrators in violation of the prohibition, how could you, by believing this man, justly ruin me?
§32σκέψασθε γὰρ τοῦτο, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί· εἰ μὴ ἐμὲ νυνί, ἀλλὰ τὸν Παρμένοντα ἐδίωκεν Ἀπατούριος οὑτοσί, εἰσπράττων τὰς εἴκοσι μνᾶς, ἰσχυριζόμενος τῇ Ἀριστοκλέους γνώσει, ὁ δὲ Παρμένων παρὼν ἀπελογεῖτο ὑμῖν καὶ μάρτυρας παρείχετο, τοῦτο μὲν ὅτι οὐ μόνῳ τῷ Ἀριστοκλεῖ, ἀλλὰ τρίτῳ ἐπέτρεψεν, §33εἶθʼ ὅτι ἀπεῖπεν αὐτῷ ἄνευ τῶν συνδιαιτητῶν καθʼ αὑτοῦ μὴ ἀποφαίνεσθαι, καὶ ὅτι ἀπολομένης αὑτῷ τῆς γυναικὸς καὶ τῶν παίδων ὑπὸ τοῦ σεισμοῦ καὶ ἐπὶ τηλικαύτην συμφορὰν ἀπάραντος οἴκαδε, ὁ τὰς συνθήκας ἠφανικὼς ἐρήμην αὑτοῦ ἐν τῇ ἀποδημίᾳ κατέγνω τὴν δίαιταν, ἔστιν ὅστις ἂν ὑμῶν ταῦτα τοῦ Παρμένοντος ἀπολογουμένου τὴν οὕτω παρανόμως γνωσθεῖσαν δίαιταν κυρίαν ἔγνω εἶναι;
For consider this, men of the jury: if Apatourius here were prosecuting not me now, but Parmenon, demanding the twenty minae and relying on the decision of Aristocles, and Parmenon were present and defending himself before you and producing witnesses, first, that he referred the matter not to Aristocles alone, but to three, then, that he forbade him to make an award against him without the co-arbitrators, and that when his wife and children had perished in the earthquake and he had departed home because of such a great calamity, the one who had made the agreements disappear condemned him in his absence during his journey abroad; is there anyone among you who, with Parmenon making this defense, would have decided that the arbitration so unlawfully decided was valid?
§34μὴ γὰρ ὅτι ἀμφισβητουμένων ἁπάντων, ἀλλʼ εἰ ἦσαν μὲν αἱ συνθῆκαι, ὡμολογεῖτο δὲ εἷς εἶναι ὁ διαιτητὴς Ἀριστοκλῆς, μὴ ἀπεῖπεν δὲ ὁ Παρμένων αὐτῷ καθʼ αὑτοῦ μὴ διαιτᾶν, ἀλλὰ συνέβη πρὶν τὴν ἀπόφασιν γενέσθαι τῆς διαίτης ἡ συμφορὰ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ, τίς οὕτως ὠμός ἐστιν ἀντίδικος ἢ διαιτητὴς ὃς οὐκ ἂν ἀνεβάλετο εἰς τὸ ἐπιδημῆσαι τὸν ἄνθρωπον;
For, I do not say if all points were disputed, but if the agreements existed, and it was agreed that Aristocles was the sole arbitrator, and Parmenon had not forbidden him to arbitrate against him, but the calamity had befallen the man before the decision of the arbitration was made, who is so brutal an opponent or arbitrator as not to have postponed it until the man returned?
εἰ δὲ ὁ Παρμένων εἰς λόγον καταστὰς πανταχοῦ δικαιότερʼ ἂν φαίνοιτο λέγων τούτου, πῶς ἂν ὀρθῶς ἐμοῦ καταγιγνώσκοιτε, ᾧ τὸ παράπαν πρὸς τὸν ἄνθρωπον τουτονὶ μηδὲν συμβόλαιόν ἐστιν;
And if Parmenon, having entered into discussion, would everywhere appear to speak more justly than this man, how could you rightly condemn me, who have absolutely no contract with this man?
§35ὅτι μὲν οὖν ἐγὼ μὲν ὀρθῶς τὴν παραγραφὴν πεποίημαι, Ἀπατούριος δὲ τὰ ψευδῆ ἐγκέκληκε καὶ παρὰ τοὺς νόμους τὴν λῆξιν πεποίηται, ἐκ πολλῶν οἶμαι ἐπιδεδεῖχθαι τοῦτο ὑμῖν, ὦ ἄνδρες δικασταί·
That I, therefore, have rightly made the special plea, and that Apatourius has brought false charges and made his claim contrary to the laws, has, I think, been demonstrated to you, men of the jury, from many facts.
τὸ δὲ κεφάλαιον, πρὸς ἐμὲ οὐδʼ ἐπιχειρήσει λέγειν Ἀπατούριος ὡς συνθῆκαί τινες αὐτῷ εἰσίν.
To sum up, Apatourius will not even attempt to say to me that there are any agreements of his.
ὅταν δὲ λέγῃ ψευδόμενος, ὡς ἐν ταῖς πρὸς τὸν Παρμένοντα συνθήκαις ἐνεγράφην ἐγγυητής, ἀπαιτεῖτε αὐτὸν τὰς συνθήκας, §36καὶ ἐνταῦθα αὐτῷ ἀπαντᾶτε, ὅτι πάντες ἄνθρωποι, ὅταν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ποιῶνται συγγραφάς, τούτου ἕνεκα σημηνάμενοι τίθενται παρʼ οἷς ἂν πιστεύσωσιν, ἵνα, ἐάν τι ἀντιλέγωσιν, ᾖ αὐτοῖς ἐπανελθοῦσιν ἐπὶ τὰ γράμματα, ἐντεῦθεν τὸν ἔλεγχον ποιήσασθαι περὶ τοῦ ἀμφισβητουμένου.
But when he says, lying, that I was registered as a surety in the agreements with Parmenon, demand the agreements from him, and meet him on this point, that all men, when they make agreements with one another, sign and deposit them with those whom they trust for this very reason, so that, if they have any dispute, they may go back to the documents and from there make the proof concerning the matter in dispute.
ὅταν δʼ ἀφανίσας τις τἀκριβὲς λόγῳ ἐξαπατᾶν πειρᾶται, πῶς ἂν δικαίως πιστεύοιτε;
But when someone, having made the truth disappear, attempts to deceive with words, how could you justly believe him?
§37ἀλλὰ νὴ Δία (τὸ ῥᾷστον τοῖς ἀδικεῖν καὶ συκοφαντεῖν προῃρημένοις) μαρτυρήσει τις αὐτῷ κατʼ ἐμοῦ.
But, by Zeus, (the easiest thing for those who have chosen to act unjustly and bring false accusations) someone will testify for him against me.
ἐὰν οὖν ἐπισκήψωμαι αὐτῷ, πόθεν τὴν ἀπόδειξιν ποιήσεται τοῦ ἀληθῆ μαρτυρεῖν;
If, therefore, I prosecute him for false testimony, from where will he make the proof that he testifies the truth?
ἐκ τῶν συνθηκῶν;
From the agreements?
τοῦτο τοίνυν μὴ ἀναβαλλέσθω, ἀλλʼ ἤδη φερέτω ὁ ἔχων τὰς συνθήκας.
Let this, then, not be delayed, but let the one who has the agreements bring them now.
εἰ δʼ ἀπολωλέναι φησίν, πόθεν λάβω ἐγὼ τὸν ἔλεγχον καταψευδομαρτυρηθείς;
But if he says they have been lost, from where shall I, having been falsely testified against, get the proof?
εἰ μὲν γὰρ παρʼ ἐμοὶ ἐτέθη τὸ γραμματεῖον, ἐνῆν αἰτιάσασθαι Ἀπατουρίῳ, ὡς ἐγὼ διὰ τὴν ἐγγύην ἠφάνικα τὰς συνθήκας· §38εἰ δὲ παρὰ τῷ Ἀριστοκλεῖ, διὰ τί, εἴπερ ἄνευ τῆς τούτου γνώμης ἀπολώλασιν αἱ συνθῆκαι, τῷ μὲν λαβόντι αὐτὰς καὶ οὐ παρέχοντι οὐ δικάζεται, ἐμοὶ δʼ ἐγκαλεῖ, μάρτυρα παρεχόμενος κατʼ ἐμοῦ τὸν ἠφανικότα τὰς συνθήκας, ᾧ προσῆκεν αὐτὸν ὀργίζεσθαι, εἴπερ μὴ κοινῇ μετὰ τούτου ἐκακοτέχνει;
For if the document had been deposited with me, it would have been possible for Apatourius to accuse me of having made the agreements disappear on account of the suretyship; but if it was with Aristocles, why, if indeed the agreements have been lost without his consent, does he not bring a lawsuit against the one who received them and does not produce them, but accuses me, producing as a witness against me the very one who made the agreements disappear, with whom he ought to be angry, if indeed he was not conspiring with him?
εἴρηταί μοι τὰ δίκαια, ὅσα ἐδυνάμην.
I have spoken what is just, as far as I was able.
ὑμεῖς οὖν κατὰ τοὺς νόμους γιγνώσκετε τὰ δίκαια.
You, then, judge what is just according to the laws.