<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.tlg005.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div n="51" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Finally, men of the jury, although he had agreed to sail to the country of Satyrus and
          to do whatever he decreed, he deceived me even in this; he refused to sail himself in
          spite of my frequent solicitations, but sent Cittus instead. On his arrival Cittus alleged
          that he was a freeman, a Milesian by birth, and that Pasion had sent him to furnish
          information about the money. </p></div><div n="52" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>When Satyrus had heard us both, he did not wish to render a decision concerning contracts
          made in Athens, especially since Pasion was absent and not likely to comply with his
          decision; but he believed so strongly that I was being wronged that he called together the
          ship owners<note resp="editor">Of the Athenian colony at Bosporus.</note> and
          asked them to assist me and not suffer me to be wronged. And he wrote a letter to the city
          of Athens and gave it to Xenotimus, son of Carcinus, for delivery. Please read the letter
          to the jury.</p><p rend="align(center)"><label>Letter</label></p></div><div n="53" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p> Although, men of the jury, my claims to justice are so many, I think that the strongest
          proof that Pasion defrauded me of my money is this—that he refused to surrender for
          torture the slave who knew about the deposit. And yet, in respect to contracts where banks
          are concerned, what stronger proof could there be than this? For witnesses certainly we do
          not use in contracts with banks.<note resp="editor">Cf. 2</note>
        </p></div><div n="54" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>I see that in private and public causes you judge that nothing is more deserving of
          belief, or truer, than testimony given under torture, and that while you think it possible
          to suborn witnesses even for acts which never occurred at all, yet that testimony under
          torture clearly shows which party is telling the truth.<note resp="editor">A
            commonplace; cf. <bibl n="Antiph. 6.25">Antiph. 6.25</bibl>.</note> Pasion, being aware
          of this, wished that in this affair you should judge by conjecture rather than know the
          exact truth. For he certainly would not be able to say that he was likely to be at a
          disadvantage if torture should be used and that for this reason the surrender of his slave
          could not reasonably be expected of him. </p></div><div n="55" subtype="section" type="textpart"><p>For you all know that if Cittus spoke against his master, he would likely suffer for the
          remainder of his life in the most cruel manner at the hands of his master, but that if he
          held firm in his denials, he would be free and have a share of my money which his master
          had taken. In spite of the fact that he was to have so great an advantage Pasion,
          conscious of his guilty deeds, submitted to stand suit and to rest under the other
          charges, all to prevent any testimony under torture being given in this case! </p></div></div></body></text></TEI>