In Defence of Euxenippus (6-10)

Suppose someone commits a religious offence. There is the method of public prosecution before the King-Archon. Or he maltreats his parents. The Archon presides over his case. Someone makes illegal proposals in the city. There is the board of Thesmothetae ready. Perhaps he does something involving summary arrest. You have the authority of the Eleven.[*] Similarly, to deal with every other offence you have established laws, offices, and courts appropriate to each.

In what cases then do you think impeachments should be used? Your answer has already been embodied in detail in the law, so as to leave no room for doubt. If any person, it says, seeks to overthrow the democracy of the Athenians. Naturally, gentlemen of the jury; for a charge like that admits of no excuse from anyone nor of an oath for postponement.[*] It should come directly into court.

Or if he attends a meeting in any place with intent to undermine the democracy, or forms a political society; or if anyone betrays a city, or ships, or any land, or naval force, or being an orator, makes speeches contrary to the interests of the Athenian people, receiving bribes. The opening provisions of the law were made applicable by you to the entire citizen body, since those are offences which anyone might commit; but the latter part is directed against the orators themselves, in whose hands the proposing of measures rests.

You would have been insane if you had framed the law in any other way; if, when the orators enjoy both the honors and the profits of speaking, you had exposed the ordinary citizen to the risks that go with them. Nevertheless, Polyeuctus is bold enough to assert, though he is bringing in an impeachment, that defendants must not make use of the impeachment law.

All other prosecutors who think it necessary, when speaking first, to steal the defendants’ arguments from them encourage the jury to refuse to listen to any defendant who does not keep within the scope of the law, to challenge his statements and tell the clerk to read the law. The opposite is true of you: it is recourse to law of which you think you should deprive Euxenippus in his defence.