Thus the law gives the sister and the sister's son an equal share of their father's and their brother's estate; but when a first cousin, or any other kinsman in a remoter degree, dies, it no longer grants such equality, but gives the male relatives the right of succession as next-of-kin in preference to the female. For it declares that “the males and the issue of the males, who are descended from the same stock, shall be preferred, even though their relationship to the deceased is more remote.” The wife of Pronapes, therefore, had no right to claim a share at all, and Thrasybulus ought to have claimed the whole if he regarded my adoption as invalid.

Yet from the first he has never disputed my title nor has he now made any claim at law to the estate, but has admitted that everything is in order. On the other hand, those who are acting for this woman have dared—such is their impudence—to claim the whole estate. Take the clauses of the lawThe law is given in extenso in Dem. 43.51. which they have violated and read them to the court.

Clause of the Law

Under this clause the sister and the nephew share and share alike. Now take this clause and read it to the court.

Clause of the Law

If there are no first cousins or their children or other relatives on the father's side, then the law gives the right of inheritance to the relatives on the mother's side, specifying the order of succession. Now take this clause and read it to the court.

Clause of the Law

Such being the provisions of the law, Thrasybulus, a male relative, has not claimed even a portion of the estate, but those who are acting for this woman, a female relative, have claimed the whole of it; so persuaded are they that loss of honor is no loss. With this object, to prove that the whole estate ought to be awarded to them, they will have the impudence to use the argument that Thrasybulus has been adopted out of his own family into that of Hippolochides. While the fact is true, the conclusion drawn from it does not apply.

For what detriment was caused by this adoption to the bond of kinship which is in question? For it was not in the right of his father but in that of his mother that he has received half the estate of Apollodorus (II.), the son of Eupolis; and by this right of kinship he might have claimed the estate now in dispute, since he has a claim prior to that of this woman, if he thought that the act of adoption was not valid;