But still you saw that Lurco was angry with Flaccus, although out of regard to
 his own dignity he was guided by some moderation in giving his evidence. For he did not conceal,
 or think it at all necessary to be silent about the cause of his anger. He complained that his
 freedman had been condemned by Flaccus when he was praetor. O how miserable is the condition of
 those who have the government of provinces! in which diligence is sure to bring enmity;
 carelessness is sure to incur reproach; severity is dangerous; liberality meets only with
 ingratitude. The conversation addressed to one is insidious; the flattery with which one is
 courted is mischievous; the countenance which every one wears towards you is friendly; the
 disposition of numbers is hostile; dislikes are secret; caresses are open; they wait with
 eagerness for the coming praetors, they fawn on those who are present, they abandon and betray
 those who are departing. But let us give over complaining, lest we should seem to be extolling
 our own wisdom in declining all provinces. He sent letters about the steward of Publius Septimius, a man of great accomplishments, which
 steward had committed murder. You might have seen Septimius burning with anger. He allowed (in
 accordance with his edict) an action against a freedman of Lurco to proceed. Lurco is his enemy.
 What then? Was Asia to be abandoned to the freedmen of influential and powerful men? or has
 Flaccus any personal hostility of any sort with your freedmen? or do you hate his severity when
 displayed in your own causes, and in those of your freedmen, though you praise impartiality when
 it is we who are on our trial? But that man Andro, who was stripped of all his property, as you say, has not come forward to
 give his evidence. What if he had? Suppose he had come.