Now you know the honesty of the man and the value of his evidence, and the whole reason of his
 enmity to Flaccus. Having been released by Hermippus after having sold him a few slaves, he came
 to Rome from thence he returned into Asia, when my brother Quintus had succeeded Flaccus in that
 government and went to him and related his story in this manner, saying that the judges being
 compelled and put in fear by the violence of Flaccus had given a false decision against their
 will. My brother as became his impartiality and prudence, decreed that if he demurred to the
 previous decision, he was to give security to double the amount; and that if he said that they
 were compelled by fear at the first trial, he should have the same judges again. He refused
 this, and as if there had been no trial and no decision, he began on the spot to demand back
 from Hermippus the slaves which he himself had sold him. Marcus Gratidius, the lieutenant,
 before whom he went refused to give him leave to proceed with the action, but declared that he
 should adhere to the decision already given. A second time,
 as he had no place anywhere where he could remain, he betook himself to Rome. Hermippus, who
 never yields to his impudence, follows him hither. Heraclides demands from Caius Plotius, a
 senator, a man of the highest character, who had served in Asia as lieutenant some slaves, which
 he said he had sold under compulsion, at a time when an unjust decision had been given against
 him. Quintus Naso, a most accomplished man, who had been praetor, is appointed judge; and when
 he showed that he was going to give sentence in favour of Plotius, Heraclides left the judge,
 and abandoned the whole cause as if he had not had a fair and legal trial. Do I appear to you, O
 judges, to be dwelling too much on each individual witness, and not to be discussing the whole
 class of witnesses, as I originally intended?