27
Such being the facts, this boy here has one of the titles mentioned in the law, and up to which the law ordains that the right of succession should extend; for he is the child of the first cousin of Hagnias, since his father Eubulides was cousin to Hagnias, whose inheritance is in question. Theopompus, on the contrary, the father of the defendant Macartatus, could not have appropriated to himself any one of the titles mentioned in the law, for he belonged to another branch of the family, that of Stratius.
28
But it is not fitting, men of the jury, that any man whatsoever should possess the estate of Hagnias, one who belongs to another branch, so long as there is left any one of those born of the branch of Hagnias; no, nor is it right to expel such person by violence, as these men are trying to do, while they are themselves more distantly related, and not of the same branch of the family. For this, men of the jury, is the point upon which Theopompus, the father of the defendant Macartatus, misled the jury.
29
Who, then, are those still surviving in the branch of Hagnias? Phylomachê, my wife, who is the daughter of Eubulides, the cousin of Hagnias, and this boy, who has been adopted into the family of Eubulides and Hagnias. Theopompus, however, the father of the defendant Macartatus, not being himself of the branch of Hagnias, told the jurymen a monstrous lie regarding Phylomachê, the sister of Polemon and the aunt of Hagnias, alleging that she was not the sister of Polemon, the son of Hagnias, by the same father and mother, and another in pretending that he himself was of the same family as Hagnias, whereas he had never belonged to it.
