for he knew that, if he did not receive the fifth of the votes cast, he would be assessed
 a penalty of one-sixth of the amount demanded—but having won over the magistrate, he again
 brought the same suit, in the belief that he risked only his court deposit-fee. And since
 I was at a loss how to cope with my difficulties, I judged that it was best to make the
 hazard equal for us both See Introduction to this
 speech. and to come before you. And these are the facts. I learn that Callimachus not only intends to speak falsely in the matter of his
 complaint, but will also deny that the arbitration took place, and that he is prepared to
 go so far as to assert that he never would have entrusted an arbitration to Nicomachus,
 whom he knew to be an old friend of ours, and further, that it is improbable that he was
 willing to accept two hundred drachmas instead of ten thousand. You must reflect, however, first, that we were not in dispute in the matter of the
 arbitration, but we committed it as an arbitration under stated terms, so that it is not
 at all strange that Callimachus chose Nicomachus as arbiter; it would have been far
 stranger if, after he had come to an agreement about the matter, he had then made
 difficulty about the choice of arbiter. In the next place, it is not reasonable to assume
 that, if ten thousand drachmas had been owing to him, he would have settled for two
 minas 10,000 drachmas=about $1800 or approximately 360
 sterling; two minas (200 drachmas)=about $36 or between seven and eight pounds. ;
 but since his charges were unjust and in the nature of blackmail, it is not astonishing
 that he was willing to take so little. Furthermore, if, after exorbitant demands, he
 exacted little, this is no proof in favor of his contention that the arbitration did not
 take place on the contrary, it confirms all the more our contention that his claim was
 unjust in the first place.