« PreviousContinue »
If this were true, on what ground did he propose to retain the privilege for the descendants of Harmodius and Aristogeiton? (§§ 125-130).
If the present system were abused by impostors claiming the exemption, the simple remedy was to call upon such men to prove their claims (§§ 131-133).
The law would injure the reputation of the State, and give it an ill name for deceiving its benefactors, for doing in public what each of its citizens would be ashamed of doing in private, for withdrawing honours through envy of those who had received them, and for sacrificing its dignity to gratify the personal malice of a man like Leptines. Leptines himself would do well to consider whether his measure did not lay him open to the suspicion that he had no wish to earn such rewards by any conduct of his own (§§ 134-145).
The supporters of Leptines were scarcely the right men to urge such a measure, even if they had not been technically disqualified by having been σúvdikoi before (§§ 146-153).
Besides other faults, the law was unconstitutional, as providing no less than three penalties for the same offence, if offence it could be called to seek reward for service to the State. It was offensive in its want of discrimination, pressing with equal hardness on the meritorious and the undeserving; and it was unstatesmanlike in making no provision for the uncertainty of the future, which might produce crises like the tyranny of the Peisistratidæ, and benefactors like Harmodius and Aristogeiton (§§ 154-162).
The Court could hardly fail to condemn the law, if only they would bear in mind the consequences that would ensue in either event, and see on which side lay the true advantage and the honour of the State;
instead of listening to the impudent clamour of evil counsellors (§§ 163-167).
We are told by Dion Chrysostomus 1 that the trial resulted in a verdict against Leptines, áλw ypa‡îs. This must be technically incorrect, as Leptines was shielded from any penal consequences by the statute of limitations; but it probably means no more than that the decision was against his law, which was repealed. Even this has been disputed by Bishop Wordsworth,2 on the authority of an inscription found in the wall of Athens, to the effect that Ctesippus, son of Chabrias, provided a chorus of boys for the Cecropid tribe, which he could not have been called upon to do, had Demosthenes secured the confirmation of his privilege. But, granting the identity of Ctesippus, it is quite possible that he might have voluntarily undertaken a burden from which he was legally exempt; so that the tablet is not necessarily inconsistent with Dion's statement. It would therefore seem probable that the contest resulted in the repeal of the obnoxious law; but it is not known whether the counter-proposal of Demosthenes, that the exemptions should be retained, with liberty to move for their repeal in individual cases of unworthiness, was accepted in its place.
1 Oratio Rhodiaca, p. 365.
2 Athens and Attica, p. 140.
ΑΤΕΛΕΙΑΣ ΠΡΟΣ ΛΕΠΤΙΝΗΝ.
ΑΝΔΡΕΣ δικασταί, μάλιστα μὲν εἵνεκα τοῦ νομίζειν συμφέρειν τῇ πόλει λελύσθαι τὸν νόμον, εἶτα καὶ τοῦ παιδὸς εἵνεκα τοῦ Χαβρίου ὡμολόγησα τούτοις ὡς ἂν οἷός τ ̓ ὦ συνερεῖν. ἔστι δ ̓ οὐκ ἄδηλον, ὦ ἄνδρες Αθηναῖοι, τοῦθ ̓, ὅτι Λεπτίνης, κἄν τις ἄλλος ὑπὲρ τοῦ νόμου λέγῃ, δίκαιον μὲν οὐδὲν ἐρεῖ περὶ αὐτοῦ, φήσει δ ̓ ἀναξίους τινὰς ἀνθρώπους εὑρομένους ἀτέλειαν ἐκδεδυκέναι τὰς λειτουργίας, καὶ τούτῳ πλείστῳ χρήσεται τῷ λόγῳ. ἐγὼ δ ̓ ὅτι μὲν τινῶν κατηγοροῦντα 2 πάντας ἀφαιρεῖσθαι τὴν δωρεὰν τῶν ἀδίκων ἐστὶν ἐάσω. καὶ γὰρ εἴρηται τρόπον τινὰ καὶ ὑφ ̓ ὑμῶν ἴσως γιγνώσκεται· ἀλλ ̓ ἐκεῖν ̓ ἂν ἐροίμην ἡδέως αὐτόν, τίνος εἵνεκ ̓, εἰ τὰ μάλιστα μὴ τινές, ἀλλὰ πάντες ἦσαν ἀνάξιοι, τῶν αὐτῶν ἠξίωσεν ὑμᾶς τε καὶ τούτους. ἐν μὲν γὰρ τῷ γράψαι “μηδένα εἶναι ἀτελῆ” τοὺς ἔχοντας ἀφείλετο τὴν ἀτέλειαν, ἐν δὲ τῷ προσγράψαι “ μηδὲ τὸ λοιπὸν ἐξεῖναι δοῦναι” ὑμᾶς τὸ δοῦναι ὑμῖν ἐξεῖναι. οὐ γὰρ ἐκεῖνό γ ̓ ἔνεστιν εἰπεῖν, ὡς τὸν αὐτὸν τρόπον, ὅνπερ οὓς ἔχοντας ἀφειλετο τὴν δωρεὰν ἀναξίους ἐνόμιζεν, οὕτω καὶ τὸν
δῆμον ἀνάξιον ἡγεῖτο κύριον εἶναι τοῦ δοῦναι, 3 ἐάν τῳ βούληται. ἀλλὰ νὴ Δί ̓ ἐκεῖν ̓ ἂν ἴσως εἴποι πρὸς ταῦτα, ὅτι διὰ τὸ ῥᾳδίως ἐξαπατᾶσθαι 458 τὸν δῆμον, διὰ τοῦθ ̓ οὕτως ἔθηκε τὸν νόμον. τί οὖν κωλύει πάντ ̓ ἀφῃρῆσθαι καὶ ὅλως τὴν πολιτείαν ὑμᾶς κατὰ τοῦτον τὸν λόγον ; οὐ γὰρ ἔστιν ἐφ' ὅτου τοῦτ ̓ οὐ πεπόνθατε τῶν πάντων, ἀλλὰ καὶ ψηφίσματα πολλὰ πολλάκις ἐξαπατηθέντες κεχειροτονήκατε, καὶ συμμάχους ἤδη τινὰς ἥττους ἀντὶ κρειττόνων ἐπείσθηθ ̓ ἑλέσθαι, καὶ ὅλως ἐν οἶμαι πολλοῖς οἷς πράττετε καὶ τοιοῦτόν 4 συμβαίνειν ἀνάγκη. ἆρ ̓ οὖν θησόμεθα νόμον διὰ ταῦτα, μηδὲ τὸ λοιπὸν ἐξεῖναι τῇ βουλῇ μηδὲ τῷ δήμῳ μήτε προβουλεύειν μήτε χειροτονεῖν μηδέν ; ἐγὼ μὲν οὐκ οἶμαι· οὐ γάρ ἐσμεν ἀφαιρεθῆναι δίκαιοι περὶ ὧν ἂν ἐξαπατηθῶμεν, ἀλλὰ διδαχθῆναι πῶς τοῦτο μὴ πεισόμεθα, καὶ θέσθαι νόμον οὐχ ὃς ἀφαιρήσεται τὸ κυρίους ἡμᾶς εἶναι, ἀλλὰ δι ̓ οὗ τὸν ἐξαπατῶντα τιμωρη σόμεθα.
5 Εἰ τοίνυν τις ἐάσας ταῦτ ̓ αὐτὸ καθ ̓ αὖτ ̓ ἐξετάσειεν, πότερόν ποτε λυσιτελέστερόν ἐστι κυρίους μὲν ὑμᾶς εἶναι τῆς δωρεᾶς, ἐξαπατηθέντας δέ τι καὶ φαύλῳ τινὶ δοῦναι, ἢ διὰ τοῦ παντελῶς ἀκύρους γενέσθαι μηδ ̓ ἂν ἄξιόν τιν ̓ εἰδῆτ ̓ ἐξεῖναι τιμῆσαι, εὕροιτ ̓ ἂν μᾶλλον ἐκεῖνο λυσιτελοῦν. διὰ τί; ὅτι ἐκ μὲν τοῦ πλείονας ἢ προσήκει τιμᾶν πολλοὺς εὖ ποιεῖν προκαλεῖσθ ̓ ὑμᾶς, ἐκ δὲ τοῦ μηδενὶ μηδέν, μηδ' ἂν ἄξιος ᾖ, διδόναι πάντας 6 ἀπείρξετε τοῦ φιλοτιμεῖσθαι. πρὸς δὲ τούτῳ καὶ
δι' ἐκεῖνο, ὅτι οἱ μὲν ἀνάξιόν τινα τιμήσαντες εὐηθείας τινὰ δόξαν ἔχοιεν ἄν, οἱ δὲ τοὺς ἀγαθόν τι ποιοῦντας ἑαυτοὺς μὴ τοῖς ὁμοίοις ἀμειβόμενοι 459 κακίας. ὅσῳ δὴ κρεῖττον εὐήθη δοκεῖν ἢ πονηρὸν εἶναι, τοσούτῳ λῦσαι τὸν νόμον κάλλιον ἢ θέσθαι.
Οὐ τοίνυν ἔμοιγ ̓ οὐδ ̓ ἐκεῖν ̓ εὔλογον, ὦ ἄνδρες 7 Αθηναίοι, σκοπουμένῳ φαίνεται, καταμεμφόμενόν τινας ἐπὶ ταῖς ὑπαρχούσαις δωρεαῖς τοὺς χρησίμους ὄντας τῶν τιμῶν ἀποστερεῖν. εἰ γὰρ ὑπαρχουσῶν τούτων φαῦλοι καὶ ἀνάξιοί τινες κατὰ τὸν τούτων λόγον εἰσίν, τί χρὴ προσδοκᾶν ἔσεσθαι τόθ', ὅταν παντελῶς μηδὲ πλέον μέλλη μηδὲν εἶναι τοῖς χρηστοῖς οὖσιν ;
Ἔτι τοίνυν ὑμᾶς κἀκεῖν ̓ ἐνθυμεῖσθαι δεῖ, ὅτι 8 ἐκ τῶν νῦν ὑπαρχόντων νόμων καὶ πάλαι κυρίων, οὓς οὐδ ̓ αὐτὸς οὗτος ἀντείποι ἂν μὴ οὐχὶ καλῶς ἔχειν, ἐνιαυτὸν διαλιπὼν ἕκαστος λειτουργεῖ, ὥστε τὸν ἥμισύν ἐστ ̓ ἀτελὴς τοῦ χρόνου. εἶθ ̓ ἧς πᾶσι μέτεστι τὸ ἥμισυ, καὶ τοῖς μηδ ̓ ὁτιοῦν ἀγαθὸν πεποιηκόσιν ὑμᾶς, ταύτης τοὺς εὖ ποιήσαντας, ἃ προστεθείκαμεν αὐτοῖς, ταῦτ ̓ ἀφελώμεθα ; μηδαμῶς· οὔτε γὰρ ἄλλως καλὸν οὔθ ̓ ὑμῖν πρέπον. πῶς γὰρ οὐκ αἰσχρόν, ὦ ἄνδρες 9 Αθηναῖοι, κατὰ μὲν τὴν ἀγορὰν ἀψευδεῖν νόμον γεγράφθαι, ἐφ ̓ οἷς οὐδέν ἐστι δημοσίᾳ βλάβος εἴ τις ψεύδεται, ἐν δὲ τῷ κοινῷ μὴ χρῆσθαι τῷ νόμῳ τούτῳ τὴν πόλιν τὴν αὐτὴν ἐπιτάξασαν τοῖς ἰδιώταις, ἀλλὰ τοὺς ἀγαθόν τι πεποιηκότας ἐξαπατῆσαι, καὶ ταῦτ ̓ οὐ μικρὰν ζημίαν ὀφλήσειν μέλλουσαν; οὐ γὰρ εἰ μὴ χρήματ ̓ ἀπόλλυτε μόνον 10