Against Alcibiades 1 (6-10)

Law

I believe, gentlemen, that he is the one citizen who is liable to the full scope of the law: for he would with justice be convicted of refusing duty, because after being enrolled as a foot-soldier he did not march out with you; of desertion, because he alone of the whole force did not present himself for the formation of the ranks; and of cowardice, because, when it was his duty to share the danger with the infantry, he chose to serve in the cavalry.

They say, indeed, that he will resort to the defence that, since he was in the cavalry, he was doing no wrong to the State. But in my opinion you would find just cause for indignation against him in the fact that, although the law provides that anyone who serves in the cavalry without having passed his scrutiny[*] shall be disfranchised, he had the audacity to serve in the cavalry without having passed his scrutiny. Now, please, read the law.

Law

There were others who had never before served in the infantry, but had always been cavalrymen and had inflicted many losses on the enemy: yet they did not venture to mount their horses, from fear of you and of the law. For they had shaped their plans on the prospect, not of the city’s destruction, but of its deliverance, its ascendancy and its retaliation upon wrongdoers. But Alcibiades was rash enough to mount, though he is no supporter of the people, nor had seen service in the cavalry before, nor is qualified for it now, nor had passed your scrutiny: he presumed that the city would be without the power to do justice upon wrongdoers.