4
I have a few more points to make, gentlemen of the jury, and after summing up my argument will leave the platform. The case in which you are going to vote is an indictment for the proposing of illegal measures and the decree under consideration is one congratulating presidents.In the 4th century B.C. the chairman of the πρυτάνεις appointed these presidents by lot, one from each tribe except that to which he himself belonged, for each meeting of the Council or Assembly. After their appointment he drew lots among them for their chairman (ἐπιστάτης). (See Aeschin. 1. 104, Aeschin. 3. 39, and Aristot. Ath. Pol. 44. 2.) Presidents should observe the law during their period of office. These men have broken it. As evidence for both these facts you heard the actual laws read.
5
The sequel now rests with you. For you will make it plain whether you are going to punish the proposers of illegal measures or whether you intend to grant those honors, which till now have been paid to your benefactors, to presidents whose conduct is not lawful; and that too when you have sworn to observe the laws in giving your vote. There is, however, one argument open to them, namely that the people were compelled to pass the votes of honor.i. e., the votes of honor for certain Macedonians. Hyperides agrees that it may have been impossible to avoid passing the votes of honor, but that there was no need to congratulate the presidents for having done so. Even this cannot possibly mislead you; for it cannot be said that we were under any compulsion to crown the presidents.
6
Moreover the defendant has himself made your decision easy, since he stated in writing his reasons for crowning them. They had, he said, been just towards the Athenian people and observed the laws during their office. That is a statement for which you must now summon him to answer. And you, Philippides, show us that what you assumed about the presidents in your decree is true and you will be acquitted.
