<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0010.tlg002.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div n="51" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> I could wish that you knew him as well as I do, in order that, instead of commiserating
          with him over his losses, you might bear him a grudge for what he has left. The fact is,
          though, that if I should try to tell of all the others who have been the objects of his
          plots, of the private law-suits in which he has been involved, of the public suits which
          he has entered, of the persons with whom he has conspired or against whom he has borne
          false witness, not even twice as much water<note resp="editor">The time
            allotted to the litigant for his speech in the Athenian law-courts was regulated by an
            official water-clock (the klepsydra). One has been found; cf. <title>Hesperia</title>
            viii., 1939.</note> as has been allotted me would prove sufficient. </p></div><div n="52" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>But when you have heard only one of the acts which he has committed you will readily
          recognize the general run of his villainy. Cratinus once had a dispute over a farm with
          the brother-in-law of Callimachus. A personal encounter ensued. Having concealed a female
          slave, they accused Cratinus of having crushed her head, and asserting that she had died
          as a result of the wound, they brought suit against him in the court of the Palladium<note resp="editor">The tribunal for cases of unpremeditated homicide; also for
            trials involving the murder of slaves, resident-aliens, and foreigners. Cf. <bibl n="Aristot. Ath. Pol. 57.3">Aristot. Ath. Pol. 57.3</bibl>.</note> on the charge of
          murder. </p></div><div n="53" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>Cratinus, learning of their plots, remained quiet for a long time in order that they
          might not change their plans and concoct another story, but instead might be caught in the
          very act of committing a crime. When the brother-in-law of Callimachus had made accusation
          and Callimachus had testified on oath that the woman was actually dead, </p></div><div n="54" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>Cratinus and his friends went to the house where she had been hidden, seized her by force
          and, bringing her into court, presented her alive to all present. The result was that, in
          a tribunal of seven hundred judges, after fourteen witnesses had given the same testimony
          as that of Callimachus, he failed to receive a single vote. Please call witnesses to these
          facts.</p><p rend="align(center)"><label>Witnesses</label></p></div><div n="55" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Who, therefore, would be able to condemn his acts as they deserve? Or who would be able
          to find a more flagrant example of wrongdoing, of malicious prosecution, and of villainy?
          Some misdeeds, it is true, do not reveal in its entirety the character of the evil-doers,
          but from acts such as his it is easy to discern the whole life of the culprits. </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>