[86]
For his sake you would have rewarded them
then; yet now, on their account, will you take away the immunity from Chabrias
himself? Why, that is absurd! For it is inconsistent to seem so generous, when
the benefits are recent, that you honor not the benefactors only but their
friends as well, but, when a short time has elapsed, to take away even the
rewards that you have given to the benefactors.1“
Decrees on the Honors of Chabrias
”
1 The argument seems to be this. Some recipients of immunity obtained similar favors for their friends. Chabrias did not, but he might have done so, and his friends might have been the undeserving persons now enjoying immunity. In this rather hypothetical case, after rewarding the jackals from gratitude to the lion, you now penalize the lion out of contempt for the jackals.
Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by C. A. Vince, M. A. and J. H. Vince, M.A. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1926.
The Annenberg CPB/Project provided support for entering this text.
Purchase a copy of this text (not necessarily the same edition) from Amazon.com
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.