But perhaps this also may occur to you, that Fannius did in
 requital promise Roscius half of whatever he might get from Flavius, but that be got
 nothing at all. What has that to do with it? You ought to regard not the result of the
 demand, but the beginning of the mutual agreement. And it does not follow, if he did not
 choose to prosecute his demand, that he did not for all that, as far as it depended on
 him, show his opinion that Roscius had only settled his own claim, and not the claim of
 the partnership. What more? Suppose I make it evident, that after the whole settlement
 come to by Roscius, after this fresh mutual agreement entered into by Fannius, Fannius
 also recovered a hundred thousand sesterces from Flavius,
 for the loss of Panurgus? Will he after that still dare to sport with the character of
 that most excellent man, Quintus Roscius?