For Polystratus

In my opinion it is not the name of the Four Hundred that should incense you, but the actions of some of their number. For there were some who had insidious designs: but the rest were resolved to do no harm either to the city or to any amongst you; they entered the Council-chamber with loyal thoughts, and the defendant, Polystratus, is one of that section. He was chosen by his tribesmen for the soundness of his views in regard to his township and also towards your people: yet they accuse him of disloyalty to your people, after he has been chosen by his tribesmen, who can best discern the character of this or that person amongst them. And what reason could he have had for courting an oligarchy? Because he was of an age to achieve success amongst you as a speaker, or because he had such bodily strength as might encourage him to commit an outrage on any of your people? But you see of what age he is: it is one that fits him rather to restrain others from such proceedings. To be sure, if a man has been disfranchised for some misdemeanor in the past, and so has courted a change in the constitution, he may be led by his past offences to seek his personal interest; but this man had committed no such offence as might lead him to hate your people in his own interest or in that of his children. One of these was in Sicily, the others were in Boeotia; so it was no interest of theirs that he should court a change in the constitution. They do accuse him of having held many magistracies, but nobody is able to show that he was a bad magistrate. My own opinion is that it is not men of his character who are guilty of wrong in such situations, but some holder of a few offices who has not held them for the best advantage of the city. For our city was not betrayed by her good magistrates, but by her dishonest ones. This man, first of all, as a magistrate in Oropus, neither betrayed you nor set up a new constitution when everyone else in office utterly betrayed their trust. They did not stay for the reckoning, thus convicting themselves of guilt; whereas he, feeling himself innocent, comes up for punishment! The guilty are smuggled out by their accusers in return for payment; but those from whom they can get no profit they expose as guilty. They make similar accusations against those who have proposed some motion in the Council and against those who have not. But this man has not even proposed one motion regarding your people; and I presume that these persons deserve no ill-treatment at your hands on the ground that, while they were loyal to you, they did not incur the enmity of that party. For those who spoke in opposition to them were either exiled or put to death, so that whoever did aspire to oppose them in your interest was invariably deterred by fright or by the slaughter of their victims. Hence in most cases they completely lost heart, since those who were not banished were executed. Those among them who engaged to obey and refrain from plotting and reporting, they placed in power. Thus a change of government would have been no easy thing for you. It is not fair, then, to punish people for matters in which they showed their loyalty to you. And I consider it monstrous that the same treatment meted out to those who proposed measures concerning your people that were not to its highest advantage should also be applied to the man who proposed nothing, and who in seventy years has committed no offence against you, let alone eight days! Those who spent their whole lives in knavery have appeared as honest men before the auditors, because they have tampered with their accusers; while those who were always honest towards you—they are the knaves.