In the same manner also they governed their relations with each other. For not only were
 they of the same mind regarding public affairs, but in their private life as well they
 showed that degree of consideration for each other which is due from men who are
 rightminded and partners in a common fatherland. The less well-to-do among the citizens were so far from envying those of greater means
 that they were as solicitous for the great estates as for their own, considering that the
 prosperity of the rich was a guarantee of their own well-being. Those who possessed
 wealth, on the other hand, did not look down upon those in humbler circumstances, but,
 regarding poverty among their fellow-citizens as their own disgrace, came to the rescue of
 the distresses of the poor, handing over lands to some at moderate rentals, sending out
 some to engage in commerce, and furnishing means to others to enter upon various
 occupations; for they had no fear that they might suffer one of two things—that they might lose their
 whole investment or recover, after much trouble, only a mere fraction of their venture; on
 the contrary, they felt as secure about the money which was lent out as about that which
 was stored in their own coffers. For they saw that in cases of contract the judges were
 not in the habit of indulging their sense of equity That
 is, their own sense of right and wrong (almost their sympathy) as distinguished from the
 legal sense. See Aristotle’s distinction between equality and justice in Aristot. Rh. 1374b 21 . “The arbitrator,” he says,
 “looks to equity; the judge, to law.” but were strictly faithful to the laws;
 and that they did not in trying others seek to make it safe for themselves to disobey the
 law, Cf. Isoc. 15.142 ,
 where he charges the Athenian juries with condoning depravity in others in order to make
 depravity safe for themselves. but were indeed more severe on defaulters than
 were the injured themselves, since they believed that those who break down confidence in
 contracts do a greater injury to the poor than to the rich; for if the rich were to stop
 lending, they would be deprived of only a slight revenue, whereas if the poor should lack
 the help of their supporters they would be reduced to desperate straits. And so because of this confidence no one tried to conceal his wealth As now, from the sycophants. See Isoc. 15.8 , note.
 The present state of affairs is described in Isoc. 15.159
 ff. nor hesitated to lend it out, but, on the contrary, the wealthy were
 better pleased to see men borrowing money than paying it back; for they thus experienced
 the double satisfaction—which should appeal to all right-minded men—of helping their
 fellow-citizens and at the same time making their own property productive for themselves.
 In fine, the result of their dealing honorably with each other was that the ownership of
 property was secured to those to whom it rightfully belonged, while the enjoyment of
 property was shared by all the citizens who needed it.