[83]
The difference is this: if he had proposed
that sureties should be appointed to guarantee the payment of the accruing
penalty, he would have embraced in his enactment the statutes under which
certain debts are doubled, and others multiplied by ten; and so the debtor would
have been obliged not only to pay in full the amount of the debt as recorded,
but also to liquidate the penal payments legally added thereto. As it is, by the
words “nominate sureties on an undertaking to pay in full the amount
in which he was indebted,” he makes the payment depend on the plaint
and the documents upon which the several delinquents were brought to trial; and
in those documents only the original amount of the debt is recorded.
Demosthenes. Demosthenes with an English translation by A. T. Murray, Ph.D., LL.D. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press; London, William Heinemann Ltd. 1939.
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.