it is possible that this was his
motive. May be. But he should then disguise his
motive, in order that he may effect his purpose.
But what will it profit us (and by us
the declaimers) to have realised this motive, unless
we declare it as well? Well, then, if the case
were being actually pleaded in the courts, should we
have disclosed this secret motive in such a way?
Again, if this is not the real motive, the condemned
man may have other reasons for opposing his son;
he may think that the law should be carried out
or be unwilling to accept such a kindness from the
hands of his accuser, or (and this is the line on which
I personally should insist) he may intend to persist
in declaring his innocence even under torture.