Against Aristogeiton II (21-25)

But after you had let him off, admittedly in hope of amendment, and then shortly after had to punish the same man again for speaking and acting against the best interests of the city, what reasonable excuse is left you if you are a second time hoodwinked? When you have tried him by deeds, why need you trust his words? In cases where you have not yet an accurate test ready to hand, it may perhaps be necessary to judge by words.

But, for myself, I am amazed that there are men so constituted that, though they deposit private property with those only whose past record shows them to be honest, they entrust public affairs to men who have been admittedly proved unscrupulous. No one would dream of setting a sorry mongrel to guard a flock; yet some people say that, to keep watch on those who administer the State, one need only employ the first comers, men who pretend to detect delinquents, but need the most careful watching themselves.

If you are wise, you will bear this in mind. Turn a deaf ear to those who profess to be devoted to you, and take your own precautions to ensure that you grant to no one the power to make your laws null and void, especially to no one of those who pretend to be able to speak and legislate in the interests of the masses. It is preposterous that your ancestors faced death to save the laws from destruction, but that you do not even punish those who have offended against the laws; that you set up in the market-place a bronze statue of Solon, who framed the laws, but show yourselves regardless of those very laws for the sake of which he has received such exceptional honor.

Is it not an absurd situation that you should by legislating express your anger against the criminals, but, when you have caught any of them red-handed, should proceed to let them go unscathed? That the lawgiver, a single individual, should on your behalf incur the hostility of all the worthless, but that you yourselves, collected together to defend your own interests, should not even display your hatred of the wicked, but should be overpowered by the wickedness of a single individual? That you should have fixed death as the penalty if anyone cites a law which does not exist, and yet should allow men to escape unpunished who reduce the existing laws to the level of laws which do not exist?

The surest way to realize the blessing of obedience to the established laws, and the curse of despising and disobeying them, is to put before your eyes and examine separately the advantages that you derive from the laws and the results of lawlessness. For you will find that the fruits of lawlessness are madness, intemperance and greed, but from the laws come wisdom, sobriety and justice.