But when they were close to the gates, and grounded arms before entering the city, Aesimus perceived him and went up to him, seized his shield, and flung it away, with the order—Be off, crows’ meat! A murderer like you must not join in the procession to Athene. This was the way in which he was driven off by Aesimus; and I will produce witnesses to the truth of my statement.

WitnessesThese were the real relations, gentlemen, that he had with the heavy-armed troops, both at Phyle and in the Peiraeus. Nobody would speak to him, as a known murderer, and Anytus was the cause of his escape from death. If, therefore, he makes use of his journey to Phyle as a plea in his defence, you must retort with the question whether Anytus was the cause of his escape from death when they were ready to do justice upon him, and whether Aesimus flung away his shield and forbade him to join in the procession.

You must not accept that plea from him, nor this one either, if he should urge it,—that we are exacting the penalty a long time after the offence. For I do not think there is any statute of limitationsSee note on Lys. 7.17. for such crimes as his: my opinion rather is that, whether brought to his account immediately or after some time, this man must prove that he has not done the things that form the subject of the charge.

Let him therefore satisfy us, either that he did not cause the death of those men, or that he did so with justice because they were doing a mischief to the Athenian people. But if we are late in punishing where we ought to have punished long ago, he is a gainer by the time in which he lived illicitly, while those men have none the less suffered death by his act.

I am told that he also takes his stand on the plea that the words in the act appear in the warrant for arrest; but this, I consider, is utter imbecility. So, without the addition of the words in the act, he would be liable to the arrest; but just because the words have been added, he thinks he can extricate himself! This simply amounts, it would seem, to an admission that he has killed, but has not been taken in the act; and to insist on that is to imply that, if he was not taken in the act, but did the killing, he ought therefore to escape.