Against Phormio

[*](It is commonly assumed that the second speaker begins with this paragraph. In Dem. 34.23 Chrysippus is referred to as οὗτος, so the fact of a change of speakers is patent.) Theodotus, men of Athens, after hearing us several times, and being convinced that Lampis was giving false testimony, did not dismiss the suit, but referred us to the court. He was loth to give an adverse decision because he was a friend of this man Phormio, as we afterwards learned, yet he hesitated to dismiss the suit lest he should himself commit perjury.

Now, in the light of the facts themselves, consider in your own minds, men of the jury, what means the man was likely to have for discharging the debt. He sailed from this port without having put the goods on board the ship, and having no adequate security; on the contrary, he had made additional loans on the credit of the money lent by me. In Bosporus he found no market for his wares, and had difficulty in getting rid of those who had lent money for the outward-voyage.

My partner here had lent him two thousand drachmae for the double voyage on terms that he should receive at Athens two thousand six hundred drachmae; but Phormio declares that he paid Lampis in Bosporus one hundred and twenty Cyzicene staters[*](The stater of Cyzicus (a town on the south shore of the Propontis, or sea of Marmora) was a coin made of electrum, an alloy of approximately three-quarters gold and one-quarter silver. It was nearly twice as heavy as the ordinary gold stater, which was worth twenty drachmae, and had a value (as stated in the text) of twenty-eight drachmae. The addition of the word there indicates that the value differed in different places according to the rate of exchange.) (note this carefully) which he borrowed at the interest paid on loans secured by real property. Now interest on real security was sixteen and two-thirds percent, and the Cyzicene stater was worth there twenty-eight Attic drachmae.

It is necessary that you should understand how large a sum he claims to have paid. A hundred and twenty staters amount to three thousand three hundred and sixty drachmae, and the interest at the land rate of sixteen and two-thirds percent on thirty-three minae and sixty drachmae is five hundred and sixty drachmae, and the total amount comes to so much.[*](That is, of course, the sum of the two items, or three thousand nine hundred and twenty drachmae. The total is not mentioned here, as it is given in the lines immediately following. Note that the speaker inexactly speaks as if the whole sum (including the interest) had been paid to Lampis (according to Phormio’s claim). The argument is, however, valid, as the sum represents the cost to Phormio of paying off the loan.)

Now, men of the jury, is there a man, or will the man ever be born, who, instead of twenty-six hundred drachmae would prefer to pay thirty minae and three hundred and sixty drachmae, and as interest five hundred and sixty drachmae by virtue of his loan, both which sums Phormio says he has paid Lampis, in all three thousand nine hundred and twenty drachmae? And when he might have paid the money in Athens, seeing that it had been lent for the double voyage, has he paid it in Bosporus, and too much by thirteen minae?

And to the creditors who lent money for the outward voyage you had difficulty in paying the principal, though they sailed with you and kept pressing you for payment; yet to this man who was not present, you not only returned both principal and interest, but also paid the penalties arising from the agreement[*](We learn from Dem. 34.33 that the contract entailed a penalty of five thousand drachmae in case a return cargo was not shipped, but of course payment could not have been exacted in Bosporus. The speaker seems to identify the overpayment of one thousand three hundred and twenty drachmae with this penalty; but the overpayment represents almost exactly the amount of the money Lampis had loaned to Phormio, plus the thirty percent interest. It is, of course, possible that the penalty of five thousand drachmae was to be paid if Phormio neither shipped the goods nor paid Lampis, and the lesser sum if payment was made to Lampis without the shipment of a return cargo.) though you were under no necessity of doing so?

And you had no fear of those men, to whom their agreements gave the right of exacting payment in Bosporus, but declare that you had regard for the claims of my partner, though you wronged him at the outset by not putting on board the goods according to your agreement in setting out from Athens? And now that you have come back to the port where the loan was made, you do not hesitate to defraud the lender, though you claim to have done more than justice required in Bosporus, where you were not likely to be punished?

All other men who borrow for the outward and homeward voyage, when they are about to set sail from their several ports, take care to have many witnesses present, and call upon them to attest that the lender’s risk begins from that moment[*](That is, from the moment of sailing.); but you rely upon the single testimony of the very man who is your partner in the fraud. You did not bring as a witness my slave who was in Bosporus or my partner, nor did you deliver to them the letters which we gave into your charge, and in which were written instructions that they should keep close watch on you in whatever you might do!

Why, men of Athens, what is there which a man of this stamp is not capable of doing, who, after receiving letters, did not deliver them in due and proper course? Or how can you fail to see that his own acts prove his guilt? Surely (O Earth and the Gods) when he was paying back so large a sum, and more than the amount of his loan, it was fitting that he should make it a much talked of event on the exchange and to invite all men to be present; but especially the servant and partner of Chrysippus.

For you all know, I fancy, that men borrow with few witnesses, but, when they pay, they take care to have many witnesses present, that they may win a reputation for honesty in business dealings. But in your case, when you were paying back both the debt and the interest on both voyages, though you had used the money for the outward voyage only, and were adding thirteen minae besides, should you not have caused many witnesses to be present? Had you done so, there is not a single merchant who would have been held in higher esteem than you.

But, as it was, instead of securing many witnesses to these acts you did everything you could that none should know, as though you were committing some crime! Again, had you been making payment to me, your creditor, in person, there would have been no need of witnesses, for you would have taken back the agreement and so got rid of the obligation; whereas in making payment, not to me, but to another on my behalf, and not at Athens but in Bosporus, when your agreement was deposited at Athens and with me, and when the man to whom you paid the money was mortal and about to undertake a voyage over such a stretch of sea, you called no one as a witness, whether slave or freeman.

Yes, he says, for the agreement bade me pay the cash to the shipowner.[*](This is best explained by assuming that the contract gave Phormio the right to pay the money to Lampis in Bosporus, if he did not ship a return cargo to Athens.) But it did not prevent you from summoning witnesses, or from delivering the letters! The parties here present[*](The reference is not wholly clear. It may be that others than Chrysippus and his partner had contributed to the sum lent to Phormio.) drew up two agreements with you in the matter of the loan, showing that they greatly distrusted you, but you assert that without a single witness you paid the gold to the shipowner, although you well know that an agreement against yourself was deposited at Athens with my colleague here!

He says that the agreement bids him pay back the money, when the ship reaches port in safety. Yes, and it bids you also to put on board the ship the goods purchased, or else to pay a fine of five thousand drachmae. You ignore this clause in the agreement, but after having from the first violated its provisions by failing to put the goods on board, you raise a dispute about a single phrase in it, though you have by your own act rendered it null and void. For when you state that you did not put the goods on board in Bosporus, but paid the cash to the shipowner, why do you still go on talking about the ship? For you have had no share in the risk, since you put nothing on board.

At first, men of Athens, he seized upon this excuse, pretending that he had shipped the goods; but when he saw that the falsity of this claim was likely to be exposed in many ways,—by the entry filed with the harbor-masters in Bosporus, and by the testimony of those who were staying in the port at the same time—then he changes his tack, enters into a conspiracy with Lampis, and declares that he has paid him the money in cash,

finding a support for his plea in the fact that the agreement so ordered, and thinking that we should not find it easy to get at the truth regarding all that they did by themselves alone. And Lampis declares that all that he said to me[*](Either the speaker was with Chrysippus at the time Lampis made this statement, or else Chrysippus is now again the speaker.) before he was corrupted by this Phormio was spoken when he was out of his head; but as soon as he got a share of my money, he declares that he is in his right mind and remembers everything perfectly!

Now, men of the jury, if it were toward myself only that Lampis were showing contempt, it would be nothing to cause surprise; but in reality he has acted far more outrageously than Phormio toward you all. For when Paerisades had published a decree in Bosporus that whoever wished to transport grain to Athens for the Athenian market might export it free of duty, Lampis, who was at the time in Bosporus, obtained permission to export grain and the exemption from duty in the name of the state; and having loaded a large vessel with grain, carried it to Acanthus[*](A town in Chalcidicê.) and there disposed of it,—he, who had made himself the partner of Phormio here with our money.

And he did this, men of the jury, though he was resident at Athens, and had a wife and children here, and although the laws have prescribed the severest penalties if anyone resident at Athens should transport grain to any other place than to the Athenian market; besides, he did this at a critical time, when those of you who dwelt in the city were having their barley-meal measured out to them in the Odeum,[*](We learn from Aristoph. Wasps 1109, that the Odeum, built by Pericles as a music school, near the great theatre, was sometimes used as a law-court, and Pollux 8.33, states that suits concerning grain were decided there. Compare Dem. 59.52. It is easy, therefore, to assume that distribution of grain may have been made there.) and those who dwelt in Peiraeus were receiving their loaves at an obol each in the dockyard and in the long-porch,[*](The long-porch was a warehouse for grain in the Peiraeus.) having their meal measured out to them a gallon[*](Literally a half-sixth (i.e. one-twelfth) of a medimnus, a measure containing about twelve gallons.) at a time, and being nearly trampled to death.

In proof that my words are true, take, please, the deposition and the law.

The Deposition. The Law

Phormio, then, with the help of this fellow as his accomplice and witness, thinks proper to rob us of our money—us, who have continually brought grain to your market, and who in three crises which have come upon the state, during which you put to the test those who were of service to the people, have not once been found wanting. Nay, when Alexander entered Thebes,[*](In 355 B.C.) we made you a free gift of a talent in cash;

and when grain earlier advanced in price and reached sixteen drachmae, we imported more than ten thousand medimni of wheat, and measured it out to you at the normal price of five drachmae a medimnus, and you all know that you had this measured out to you in the Pompeium.[*](This was a hall near the Dipylon, in which the dresses and other properties used in the Panathenaic procession (πομπή) were kept.) And last year my brother and I made a free gift of a talent to buy grain for the people.

Read, please, the depositions which establish these facts.

The Depositions

Surely, if any inference may be based upon these facts, it is not likely that we should freely give such large sums in order to win a good name among you, and then should bring a false accusation against Phormio in order to throw away even the reputation for honorable dealing which we had won. It is right, therefore, that you should come to our aid, men of the jury. I have shown you that Phormio in the first place did not put on board the vessel goods to the value of all the loans which he had secured at Athens, and that with the proceeds from the goods sold in Bosporus he with difficulty satisfied his creditors who had lent money for the outward voyage;