24
As for me, men of Athens, I did not venture to propose anything that was unconstitutional, but it was not so to propose the direct contrary of Philocrates’ decree, as I can prove to you. For the decree of Philocrates, through which you lost Amphipolis, was itself contrary to the earlier decrees by which you claimed possession of that territory.
25
So it was this decree of Philocrates that was unconstitutional, nor would it have been possible to draft a constitutional proposal in conformity with his unconstitutional decree. By drafting mine to agree with the earlier decrees, which were constitutional and which also kept your territory intact, I both kept within the constitution and was able to convict Philip of trying to deceive you and of wishing, not to amend the peace, but to bring discredit on those who were pleading your cause.
26
You are all aware that, after conceding the right to amend the peace, he now denies it. He says that Amphipolis is his, because your decree that he should keep what he held confirmed his right. It is true that you passed that decree, but you never admitted his right to Amphipolis, for it is possible to hold what belongs to another, and it is not all holders who hold what is their own, but many are in possession of what is really another’s. So his clever quibble is merely foolish.
27
Moreover he remembers the decree of Philocrates, but he has quite forgotten the letter sent to you when he was besieging Amphipolis, in which he admitted that Amphipolis was yours; for he said that when he had taken it he would restore it to you, implying that it was your property, and not that of the holders.
28
Apparently those who inhabited Amphipolis, before Philip took it, were holding Athenian territory; but when he has taken it, it is no longer our territory, but his own, that he holds; and in the same way at Olynthus and Apollonia and Pallene he is in possession of his own property, not that of others.
