<TEI xmlns="http://www.tei-c.org/ns/1.0" xmlns:py="http://codespeak.net/lxml/objectify/pytype" py:pytype="TREE"><text xml:lang="eng"><body><div type="translation" n="urn:cts:latinLit:phi0474.phi002.perseus-eng2" xml:lang="eng"><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="115" resp="perseus"><p>Now it is not Sextus Roscius who
          gave him this commission, but what is a much more serious thing, Sextus Roscius himself,
          with his character, his life, and all his property, is publicly entrusted by the senators
          to Roscius; and, of this trust, Titus Roscius has converted not some small portion to his
          own advantage, but has turned him entirely out of his property; he has bargained for three
          farms for himself; he has considered the intention of the senators and of all his
          fellow-citizens of just as much value as his own integrity.</p></div><milestone n="40" unit="chapter" resp="yonge"/><milestone unit="Para"/><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="116" resp="perseus"><p>Moreover, consider now, O judges, the other matters, that you may see that no crime can
          be imagined with which that fellow has not disgraced himself. In less important matters,
          to deceive one's partner is a most shameful thing, and equally base with that which I have
          mentioned before. And rightly; because he who has communicated an affair to another thinks
          that he has procured assistance for himself. To whose good faith, then, shall a man have
          recourse who is injured by the want of faith in the man whom he has trusted? But these
          offences are to be punished with the greatest severity which are guarded against with the
          greatest difficulty. We can be reserved towards strangers; intimate friends must see many
          things more openly; but how can we guard against a companion? for even to be afraid of him
          is to do violence to the rights of duty. Our ancestors therefore rightly thought that he
          who had deceived his companion ought not to be considered in the number of good men.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="117" resp="perseus"><p>But Titus Roscius did not deceive one friend alone
          in a money matter, (which, although it be a grave offence, still appears possible in some
          degree to be borne) but he led on, cajoled, and deserted nine most honourable men,
          betrayed them to their adversaries, and deceived them with every circumstance of fraud and
          perfidy. They who could suspect nothing of his wickedness, ought not to have been afraid
          of the partner of their duties; they did not see his malice, they trusted his false
          speech. Therefore these most honourable men are now, on account of his treachery, thought
          to have been incautious and improvident He who was at the beginning a traitor, then a
          deserter—who at first reported the counsels of his companions to their adversaries, and
          then entered into a confederacy with the adversaries themselves, even now terrifies us,
          and threatens us, adorned with his three farms, that is, with the prizes of his
          wickedness. In such a life as his, O judges, amid such numerous and enormous crimes, you
          will find this crime too, with which the present trial is concerned.</p></div><div type="textpart" subtype="section" n="118" resp="perseus"><p>In truth you ought to make investigation on this principle; where you
          see that many things have been done avariciously, many audaciously, many wickedly, many
          perfidiously, there you ought to think that wickedness also lies hid among so many crimes;
          although this indeed does not lie hid at all, which is so manifest and exposed to view,
          that it may be perceived, not by those vices which it is evident exist in him, but even if
          any one of those vices be doubted of, he may be convicted of it by the evidence of this
          crime. What then, I ask, shall we say, O judges? Does this gladiator seem entirely to have
          thrown off his former character? or does that pupil of his seem to yield but little to his
          master in skill? Their avarice is equal, their dishonesty similar, their impudence is the
          same; the audacity of the one is twin-sister to the audacity of the other.</p></div></div></body></text></TEI>