Now, men of the jury, is there a man, or will the man ever be born, who, instead of twenty-six hundred drachmae would prefer to pay thirty minae and three hundred and sixty drachmae, and as interest five hundred and sixty drachmae by virtue of his loan, both which sums Phormio says he has paid Lampis, in all three thousand nine hundred and twenty drachmae? And when he might have paid the money in Athens, seeing that it had been lent for the double voyage, has he paid it in Bosporus, and too much by thirteen minae?

And to the creditors who lent money for the outward voyage you had difficulty in paying the principal, though they sailed with you and kept pressing you for payment; yet to this man who was not present, you not only returned both principal and interest, but also paid the penalties arising from the agreementWe learn from Dem. 34.33 that the contract entailed a penalty of five thousand drachmae in case a return cargo was not shipped, but of course payment could not have been exacted in Bosporus. The speaker seems to identify the overpayment of one thousand three hundred and twenty drachmae with this penalty; but the overpayment represents almost exactly the amount of the money Lampis had loaned to Phormio, plus the thirty percent interest. It is, of course, possible that the penalty of five thousand drachmae was to be paid if Phormio neither shipped the goods nor paid Lampis, and the lesser sum if payment was made to Lampis without the shipment of a return cargo. though you were under no necessity of doing so?