Comparison of Demosthenes and Cicero

And when in Rome itself he was appointed consul in name, but really received the power of a dictator and sole ruler against Catiline and his conspirators, he bore witness to the truth of Plato’s prophecy[*](Republic, p. 473 d.) that states would then have respite from evil, when in one and the same person, by some happy fortune, great power and wisdom should be conjoined with justice.

Moreover, it is said to the reproach of Demosthenes that he made money by his eloquence, since he secretly wrote speeches for Phormio and Apollodorus, who were adversaries in the same case, and since he was accused in the matter of the Great King’s money, and condemned for taking that of Harpalus. And if we should say that those who write things (and these writers are not few) tell what is untrue,

still, at least, that Demosthenes could not bring himself to look within indifference upon gifts which kings offered as marks of honour and favour, and that this was not to be expected of a man who lent money on bottomry, it is impossible to deny; whereas, in the case of Cicero, that the Sicilians when he was quaestor, and the king of Cappadocia when he was pro-consul, and his friends in Rome when he was going into exile, offered him large sums and begged him to take them, only to meet with his refusal, has been said.