The Double Indictment (21-25)

I shall not detain you long, gentlemen of the jury; there is no occasion for me to do so. If it were true, as the plaintiff asserts, that Dionysius was her lover, and that my client by means of drugs or incantations had constrained him to withdraw his affections from the plaintiff and transfer them to herself,—if this were true, then my client might fairly be accused of witchcraft, nor could her wicked practices upon her rival’s admirers escape condemnation. On the other hand, if a free citizen of a free state, deciding for himself in a matter where the law is silent, takes a violent aversion to this lady’s person, concludes that the blessedness with which she promises to crown his labours is neither more nor less than moonshine, and accordingly makes the best of his way out of her labyrinthine maze of argument into the attractive arms of Pleasure, bursts the bonds of verbal subtlety, exchanges credulity for common sense, and pronounces, with great justice, that toil is toilsome, and that pleasure is pleasant,—I ask, is this shipwrecked mariner to be excluded from the calm haven of his desire, and hurled back headlong into a sea of toil? is this poor suppliant at the altar of Mercy—in other words of Pleasure—is he to be delivered over into the power of perplexity,—and all on the chance that his hot climb up the steep hill of Virtue may be rewarded with a glimpse of that celebrated lady on the top, and his life of toil followed by a hereafter of happiness?. We could scarcely ask for a better judge of the matter than Dionysius himself. He was as familiar with the Stoic doctrines as any man, and held at one time that virtue was the only Good: but he presently discovered that toil was an evil: he then chose what seemed to him the better course. He would no doubt observe that those philosophers who had so much to say on the subject of patience and endurance under toil were secretly the servants

They cannot bear to be detected in any relaxation, or any departure from their principles: but, poor men, they lead a Tantalus life of it in consequence, and when they do get a chance of sinning without being found out, they drink down pleasure by the bucketful. Depend on it, if some one would make them a present of Gyges’s ring of invisibility, or Hades’s cap, they would cut the acquaintance of toil without further ceremony, and elbow their way into the presence of Pleasure; they would all be Dionysiuses then. As long as Dionysius was well, he thought that there was some good in all this talk about endurance; but when he fell ill, and found out what pain really was, he perceived that his body was of another school than the Porch, and held quite other tenets: he was converted, realized that he was flesh and blood, and from that day ceased to behave as if he were made of marble; he knew now that the man who talks nonsense about the iniquity of pleasure But toys with words: his thoughts are bent elsewhither.

And now, gentlemen, I leave you to your vote.

Not yet! Let me ask him a few questions.

Yes? I am ready.

You hold toil to be an evil?

I do.

And pleasure a good?

Unquestionably.

Do you recognize the distinction between differentia and indifferentia? between praeposita and rejecta?

Why, certainly.

Madan, this discussion must cease; the jury say they do not understand word-chopping. They will now give their votes,

Who wins?

Unanimous verdict for Pleasure.

1 appeal to Zeus.

By all means. Next case, Hermes.

Luxury v. Virtue, re Aristippus; Aristippus must appear in person.

I ought to speak first. Aristippus is mine; his words and his deeds alike proclaim him mine.

On the contrary, any one who will observe his garlands and his purple robes and his perfumes will agree that he is mine.

Peace! This suit must stand over, until Zeus has decided the appeal re Dionysius. The cases are similar. If Porch wins her appeal, Aristippus shall be adjudged to Virtue: if not, Luxury must have him. Bring the next case. By the way, those jurors must not have their fee; they have not earned it.

So the poor old gentlemen have climbed up all this way for nothing!

Well, they must be content with a third. Now go away, all of you, and don’t be cross; you shall have another chance.

Diogenes of Sinope wanted! Bank, it is for you to speak.

Look here, Madam Justice, if she doesn’t stop bothering, I shall have assault and battery to answer for before long, instead of desertion; my stick is ready.

What is the meaning of this? Bank has run away, and Diogenes after her, with his stick raised. Poor Bank! I am afraid she will be roughly handled. Call Pyrrho.

Here is Painting, but Pyrrho has never come up. I knew how it would be.

And what was his reason?

He holds that there is no such thing as a true decision.

Then judgement goes against him by default. Now for the Syrian advocate. The indictments were only filed a day or two ago; there wasno such hurry. However—. We will first take the case in which Rhetoric is plaintiff. How people crowd in to hear it!

Just so: the case has not had -time to get stale, you see; it has the charm of novelty, the indictment, as you say, having only been filed yesterday. The prospect, too, of hearing the Syrian defend himself against two such plaintiffs as Rhetoric and Dialogue, one after the other, is a great attraction, Well, Rhetoric, when are you going to begin?