M. Tullius Cicero, For Rabirius Postumus
C. D. Yonge, Ed.

And this intimate companion and friend of mine says also that the men of Alexandria had the same reason for praising Gabinius that I had for defending him. My reason, O Caius Memmius, for defending him was, that I had become reconciled to him. Nor do I repent of considering my friendships immortal, but my enmities mortal. For if you think that I defended him against my will, because I did not like to offend Pompeius, you are very ignorant both of his character and of mine. [33] For Pompeius would not have wished me to do anything contrary to my inclination for his sake. Nor would I, to whom the liberty of all the citizens has always been the dearest object, ever have abandoned my own. As long as I was on terms of the greatest enmity to Gabinius, Pompeius was in no respect the less my dearest friend. Nor after I had made to his authority that concession to which it was entitled from me, did I feign anything I could not behave with treachery so as to injure the very man whom I had just been obliging. For by refusing to be reconciled to my enemy, I was doing no harm to Pompeius; but if I had allowed him to reconcile us, and yet had myself been reconciled to Gabinius with a treacherous intention I should have behaved dishonestly,—principally, indeed, to myself, but in the next degree to him also,. [34]

But, however, I will say no more about myself. Let us return to those Alexandrians. What a face those men have! What audacity! The other day, when you were present at the trial of Gabinius, they were cross-examined at every third word they said. They declared that the money had not been given to Gabinius. The evidence of Pompeius was read at the same time, to the effect that be had written to the king that no money had been given to Gabinius except for military purposes. “At that time,” says the prosecutor, “the judges refused to believe the Alexandrians.” What does he say next? “Now they do believe them.” [35] Why so? “Because they now affirm what they then denied.” What of that? Is this the way in which we are to regard witnesses,—to refuse them belief when they deny a thing, but to believe the very same men when they affirm a thing? But if they told the truth then, when they spoke with every appearance of truth, they are telling lies now. If they told lies then, they must give us good proof that they are now speaking the truth. Why need I say more. Let them hold their tongues. We have heard men speak of Alexandria before. Now we know it from our own experience. Thence it is, that every sort of chicanery comes. Thence, I say, comes every sort of deceit. It is from that people that all the plots of the three writers are derived. And, indeed, there is nothing which I wish for more, O judges, than to see the witnesses face to face.