19.
I recollected myself after a time, and adopted this resolution, that I must needs act
boldly; that the age which I was of at that time generally had much allowance made for it,
even if I were to stand by men in danger, though their cause had but little justice in it. And
so I acted. I strove and contended by every possible means, I had recourse to every possible
expedient, to every imaginable excuse in the case, which I could think of; so as, at all
events, (though I am almost ashamed to say it,) no one could think that the cause had been
left without an advocate.
[52]
But, whatever excuse I tried to
put forth, the prosecutor immediately wrested out of my hands. If I asked what enmity there
was between Scamander and Habitus, he admitted that there was none. But he said that
Oppianicus, whose agent he had been, had always been and still was most hostile to Habitus. If
again I urged that no advantage would accrue to Scamander by the death of Habitus; he admitted
that, but he said that all the property of Habitus would come to the wife of Oppianicus, a man
who had had plenty of practice in killing his wives. When I employed this argument in the
defence, which has always been considered a most honourable one to use in the causes of
freedmen, that Scamander was highly esteemed by his patron; he admitted that, but asked, Who
had any opinion of that patron himself?
[53]
When I urged at
some length the argument, that plot might have been laid against Scamander by Diogenes, and
that it might have been arranged between them on some other account that Diogenes should bring
him medicine, not poison that this might happen to any one; he asked why he came into such a
place as that, into so secret a place, why he came by himself, why he came with a sum of money
sealed up. And lastly, at this point, our cause was weighed down by witnesses, most honourable
men. Marcus Bebrius said that Diogenes had been bought by his advice, and that he was present
when Scamander was seized with the poison and the money in his possession. Publius Quintilius
Varus a man of the most scrupulous honour, and of the greatest authority, said that
Cleophantus had conversed with him about the plots which were being laid against Habitus, and
about the tampering with Diogenes, while the matter was fresh.
[54]
And all through that trial, though we appeared to be defending Scamander, he
was the defendant only in name, but in reality, it was Oppianicus who was in peril, and who
was the object of the whole prosecution. Nor, indeed, was there any doubt about it, nor could
he disguise that that was the case. He was constantly present in court, constantly interfering
in the case; he was exerting all his zeal and all his influence. And lastly, which was of
great injury to our cause, he was sitting in that very place as if he were the defendant. The
eyes of all the judges were directed, not towards Scamander, but towards Oppianicus; his fear,
his agitation, his countenance betraying suspense and uncertainty, his constant change of
colour, made all those things, which were previously very suspicious, palpable and evident.
This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.