Hence this is the beginning of the complaint: Demosthenes makes the following charges against Aphobus. Aphobus has in his possession moneys of mine, received by him in his capacity as guardian, as follows: eighty minae, which he received as the marriage-portion of my mother in accordance with the terms of my father’s will. This is the first of the sums of which I claim to have been defrauded. Now what was the declaration of the witnesses? That they were present before the arbitrator, Notharchus, when Aphobus admitted that Milyas was a freeman, having been emancipated by the father of Demosthenes.

Consider now for yourselves whether in your judgement there could be an orator, or sophist or magician so wondrously clever in speaking as by means of this testimony to convince any man on earth that Aphobus is in possession of the marriage-portion of the speaker’s mother. What in heaven’s name would he say? Aphobus has admitted that Milyas is a freeman. And why on that account is he any the more in possession of the marriage-portion? The statement would surely not seem to prove it.

But how was it proved? In the first place, Therippides, his co-trustee, testified that he had given him the money. Secondly, Demo, his uncle, and the rest of the witnesses who were present, testified that he agreed to supply my mother with maintenance, as being in possession of her portion. Against these men he has lodged no charges, plainly because he knew that their testimony was true. Besides this, my mother was ready to call to her side my sister and myself, and swear with imprecations on our heads, if she spoke falsely, that Aphobus had received her marriage-portion according to the terms of my father’s will.

Shall we, then, say, or shall we not, that he has possession of these eighty minae? And was it on the evidence of these witnesses here or of those that he was convicted? I think it was on the evidence of truth. He has enjoyed the interest on this sum for ten years, and even though judgement has been given against him, cannot bring himself to pay it back. Despite this, he declares that he has been outrageously treated and that he lost the suit by reason of these witnesses. Yet not one of them testified that he had received the marriage-portion.

With regard to the maritime loan,With reference to these items see Dem. 27 the sofa-makers, and the iron and the ivory that were left me, and my sister’s marriage-portion, at the purloining of which Aphobus connived in order to secure for himself the right to take whatever he pleased of my goods, listen, and see how just was the verdict given against him, and how absurd it would have been to examine Milyas by torture regarding any of these matters.