Against Athenogenes (20-21)

In using an argument like this, gentlemen of the jury, he is accusing, not excusing, himself, since he is admitting that I need not pay the debts. For if he says that he did not know the full amount owing, surely he cannot claim that he informed me of the debts beforehand; and I am not bound to pay those of which the seller did not notify me. You knew that Midas owed this money, Athenogenes, as I think we all realize for several reasons, and chiefly because you summoned Nicon to give security for me[*] ⋯

in this way. If ignorance prevented you from informing me in advance of all the debts, and if I thought when I concluded the agreement that your statement covered them all, which of us has to pay them? The subsequent purchaser, or the man who owned the business originally, when the money was borrowed? Personally I think that you are liable. But if it turns out that we disagree on this, let the law be our arbiter, which was made neither by lovers nor men with designs on other people’s property but by that great democrat Solon.