Against Dionysodorus

I am a sharer in this loan, men of the jury. We, who have engaged in the business of overseas trade and put our money in the hands of others, have come to know one thing very clearly: that in all respects the borrower has the best of us. He received the money in cash which was duly acknowledged, and has left us on a scrap of paper[*](That is, of course, papyrus.) which he bought for a couple of coppers, his agreement to do the right thing. We on our part do not promise to give the money, we give it outright to the borrower.

What, then, do we rely upon, and what security do we get when we risk our money? We rely upon you, men of the jury, and upon your laws, which ordain that all agreements into which a man voluntarily enters with another shall be valid. But in my opinion there is no use in your laws or in any contract, if the one who receives the money is not thoroughly upright in character, and does not either fear you[*](That is, the jury in the law-courts.) or regard the rights of the one making the loan.

Now Dionysodorus here does neither the one nor the other, but has come to such a pitch of audacity, that although he borrowed from us three thousand drachmae upon his ship on the condition that it should sail back to Athens, and although we ought to have got back our money in the harvest-season of last year, he took his ship to Rhodes and there unladed his cargo and sold it in defiance of the contract and of your laws[*](Athenian dealers were allowed to ship grain only to Athens, not to foreign ports; cf. Dem. 56.10 infra.); and from Rhodes again he despatched his ship to Egypt, and from thence back to Rhodes, and to us who lent our money at Athens he has up to this day neither paid back our money nor produced to us our security.

Nay, for two years now he has been using our money for his profit, keeping the loan and the trade and the ship that was mortgaged to us, and notwithstanding this he has come into your court, intending plainly to get us fined with the sixth part of the damages,[*](For this fine, the ἐπωβελία, imposed upon the plaintiff, he failed to obtain a fifth of the votes, see note on p. 50 of vol. 1.) and to put us in prison,[*](Properly the lodging. The same euphemism occurs in Dem. 32.29.) besides robbing us of our money. We therefore, men of Athens, beg and implore you one and all to come to our aid, if you find that we are being wronged. But first I want to explain to you how the loan was contracted; for thus it will be easiest for you also to follow the case.

This Dionysodorus, men of Athens, and his partner Parmeniscus came to us last year in the month Metageitnion,[*](The month Metageitnion corresponds to the latter half of August and the prior half of September.) and said that they desired to borrow money on their ship on the terms that she should sail to Egypt and from Egypt to Rhodes or Athens, and they agreed to pay the interest for the voyage to either one of these ports.

We answered, men of the jury, that we would not lend money for a voyage to any other port than Athens, and so they agreed to return here, and with this understanding they borrowed from us three thousand drachmae on the security of their ship for the voyage out and home; and they entered into a written agreement to these terms. In the contract Pamphilus here was named the lender; but I, although not mentioned, was a sharer in the loan.

And first the clerk shall read to you the agreement.

The Agreement

In accordance with this agreement, men of the jury, Dionysodorus here and his partner Parmeniscus, when they had got the money from us, despatched their ship from Athens to Egypt. Parmeniscus sailed in charge of the ship; Dionysodorus remained at Athens. All these men, I would have you know, men of the jury, were underlings and confederates of Cleomenes, the former ruler of Egypt,[*](After his conquest of Egypt in 331 B.C. Alexander had made Cleomenes collector of revenues for that province.) who from the time he received the government did no small harm to your state, or rather to the rest of the Greeks as well, by buying up grain for resale and fixing its price, and in this he had these men as his confederates.

Some of them would despatch the stuff from Egypt, others would sail in charge of the shipments, while still others would remain here in Athens and dispose of the consignments. Then those who remained here would send letters to those abroad advising them of the prevailing prices, so that if grain were dear in your market, they might bring it here, and if the price should fall, they might put in to some other port. This was the chief reason, men of the jury, why the price of grain advanced; it was due to such letters and conspiracies.

Well then, when these men despatched their ship from Athens, they left the price of grain here pretty high, and for this reason they submitted to have the clause written in the agreement binding them to sail to Athens and to no other port. Afterwards, however, men of the jury, when the ships from Sicily had arrived, and the prices of grain here were falling, and their ship had reached Egypt, the defendant straightway sent a man to Rhodes to inform his partner Parmeniscus of the state of things here, well knowing that his ship would be forced to touch at Rhodes.

The outcome was that Parmeniscus, the defendant’s partner, when he had received the letter sent by him and had learned the price of grain prevailing here, discharged his cargo of grain at Rhodes and sold it there in defiance of the agreement, men of the jury, and of the penalties to which they had of their own will bound themselves, in case they should commit any breach of the agreement, and in contempt also of your laws which ordain that shipowners and supercargoes shall sail to the port to which they have agreed to sail or else be liable to the severest penalties.

We on our part, as soon as we learned what had taken place, were greatly dismayed at his action, and went to this man, who was the prime mover in the whole plot, complaining angrily, as was natural, that although we had expressedly stipulated in the agreement that the ship should sail to no other port than to Athens, and had lent our money on this condition, he had left us open to suspicion with people who might wish to accuse and say that we also had been partners to the conveyance of the grain to Rhodes; and complaining also that he and his partner, despite their agreement to do so, had not brought the ship back to your port.

When, however, we made no headway in talking about the agreement and our rights, we demanded that he at any rate pay us back the amount loaned with the interest as originally agreed upon. But the fellow treated us with such insolence as to declare that he would not pay the interest stipulated in the agreement. If, however, he said, you are willing to accept the interest calculated in proportion to the voyage completed, I will give you, said he, the interest as far as Rhodes; but more I will not give. Thus he made a law for himself and refused to comply with the just terms of the agreement.

When we said that we could not acquiesce in anything like this, considering that, were we to do so, it would be an admission that we too had been engaged in conveying grain to Rhodes, he became even more insistent, and came up to us, bringing a host of witnesses, asserting that he was ready to pay us the principal with interest as far as Rhodes; not that he had any more intention to pay, men of the jury, but suspecting that we should be unwilling to accept the money on account of the charges to which our action might give rise. The result made this clear.

For when some of your citizens, men of Athens, who chanced to be present advised to accept what was offered and to sue for the amount under dispute, but not to admit the reckoning of the interest to Rhodes until the case should be settled we agreed to this. We were not unaware, men of the jury, of our rights under the agreement, but we thought it better to suffer some loss and to make a concession, so as not to appear litigious. But when the fellow saw that we were on the point of accepting his offer, he said, Well, then, cancel the agreement. We cancel the agreement?

Indeed we will not. However, as far as concerns any money you may pay we will in the presence of the banker agree to annul the agreement; but cancel it in its entirety we will not, until we get a verdict on the matters under dispute. For what just plea shall we have, or on what can we rely when we come to a contest at law, whether we have to appear before an arbitrator or before a court, if we have cancelled the agreement on which we rely for the recovery of our rights?

Such was our answer to him, men of the jury, and we demanded of this fellow Dionysodorus that he should not disturb or annul the agreement which these men themselves admitted to be binding, but that in regard to the amount he should pay us what he himself acknowledged to be due and to leave the settlement of the sum under dispute (with the understanding that the money was available) to the decision of one or more arbitrators, as he might prefer, to be chosen from among the merchants of this port. Dionysodorus, however, would not listen to anything of this sort, but because we refused to accept what he agreed to pay and cancel the agreement altogether, he has for two years kept and made use of our capital;

and what is the most outrageous thing of all, men of the jury, the fellow himself gets maritime interest[*](Maritime loans appear to have commanded a higher rate of interest than those secured by real property because of the greater risk involved. In Dem. 50.17 we are told of a maritime loan contracted at 12 1/2%, but the rate of interest varied.) from other people from our money, lending it, not at Athens or for a voyage to Athens, but for voyages to Rhodes and Egypt, while to us who lent him money for a voyage to your port he thinks he need do nothing that justice demands

To prove that I am speaking the truth, the clerk shall read you the challenge which I gave Dionysodorus concerning these matters.

The Challenge

This challenge, then, we tendered to this Dionysodorus again and again, and we exposed the challenge to public view over a period of many days. He, however, declared that we must be absolute simpletons, if we supposed him to be senseless enough to go before an arbitrator—who would most certainly condemn him to pay the debt—when he might come into court bringing the money with him, and then, if he could hoodwink you he would go back keeping possession of what was another’s, and if he could not, he would then pay the money. Thus he showed that he had no confidence in the justice of his case, but that he wished to make trial of you.

You have heard, then, men of the jury, what Dionysodorus has done; and as you have heard I fancy you have long been amazed at his audacity, and have wondered upon what in the world he relies in coming into court. For is it not the height of audacity, when a man who has borrowed money from the port of Athens,

and has expressly agreed in writing that his ship shall return to your port, or that, if she does not, he shall pay double the amount, has not brought the ship to the Peiraeus and does not pay his debt to the lenders; and as for the grain, has unladed that and sold it at Rhodes, and then despite all this dares to look into your faces?