Against Philocrates (1-5)

But I expect, gentlemen, that you are all aware that the reason why you voted for the death-sentence upon Ergocles was because his misappropriation of public funds had procured him a fortune of more than thirty talents. Of that money not a sign is to be found in the city. Yet whither should we turn, where are we to look, for the money? For if it cannot be found in the hands of his relatives and the persons with whom he was most intimately associated, we shall have a hard task to discover it in the hands of his enemies.

And whom did Ergocles value more than Philocrates, or with what man alive had he more intimate relations? Did he not pick him from amongst your infantry for service abroad, and make him his purser, and finally appoint him to equip a warship?

How very strange that, whereas men of property lament that they have to equip warships, this man, who was previously possessed of nothing, at that time volunteered this public service! So it was not to penalize him that he appointed him to equip a warship, but to let him profit by it and also keep guard over his own funds, since he had nobody whom he could trust above this man.

I conceive, gentlemen of the jury, that Philocrates can defend himself in two ways, and in two only: he must prove either that Ergocles’ money is held by others; or that he was put to death unjustly, having embezzled none of your property, and having taken no bribes. If he can do neither of these things, I say that his condemnation is decided, and also that, if you are indignant with those who take money from other people, you ought not to pardon those who are in possession of your own.