The remaining alternative is for him to
 contend that Cluvius told a falsehood to Luscius and Manilius. And, if he does that, how
 great is his impudence! Will he throw discredit on that man as a witness whom he
 approved of as a judge? Will he say that you ought not to trust that man whom he has
 trusted himself? Will he disparage the credit of that man as a witness to the judge,
 when on account of his opinion of his good faith and scrupulousness as a judge, he
 brought witnesses before him? When I produce that man as a witness, will he dare to find
 fault with him, when if I were to bring him as a judge even, he would be bound not to
 decline him? Oh, but says he, he was not on his oath when he said that to Luscius and
 Manilius. Would you believe him, if he said it on his oath?