44
I therefore brought the books to the arbitrator. Phormio and Euphraeus, who had paid the money to the persons designated by Timotheus, were present, and they exposed his falsehoods by showing the date at which he had contracted each loan, the person who received the money, and the use for which he expended it. Regarding the one thousand three hundred and fifty-one drachmae two obols, which he borrowed as the first loan in the month Munichion in the archonship of Socratidas, when he was about to set out on his voyage, and which the defendant ordered to be paid to Antimachus, his treasurer, he declared that my father lent the money to Antimachus on his own private account, and that he (the defendant) did not himself receive it.
45
To prove the truth of this statement he has produced no witness, but is vigorous in his assertion, in order that it may not appear that he is himself defrauding us, but that Antimachus borrowed the money. And yet, men of the jury, I will give you a convincing proof that my father lent the money, not to Antimachus, but to Timotheus when he was about to sail. For which do you think would have been the easier course for my father, to file a claim against the estate of Antimachus, when his property was confiscated, for this sum as due to him, supposing he had lent it to Antimachus,
46
or to wait until the defendant might be in better circumstances so as to collect it from him, seeing that he had at that time little hope of deliverance? Surely, if he had filed the claim, he would not have been at a loss to find the deposit money,This was a small sum to cover court charges. nor would you have had any cause to disbelieve him. For you all know that my father had no wish unjustly to acquire public funds, but that he willingly expended his own money in your service whenever you bade him do so;
