Interrogate him to these points, and do not forget to examine him concerning the marriagefeast supposed to be given to the members of his ward; this is no light argument against the teftimony of Nicodemus; for, could they have prevailed with him to marry the woman, he might surely have been induced to give an entertainment to the men of his ward, and to prefent this girl to them as his legitimate child, who, if he had been really married, was heiress to a fortune of three talents. He would have been obliged alfo to entertain the wives of his companions at the festival of Ceres, and to have borne fuch offices in his borough on account of his wife, as are required from a man of his poffeffions: yet nothing of this kind will appear to have been done. The members of his ward have given their evidence: I fhall, therefore, conclude with the teftimony of his fellow-burgeffes. DEPOSITIONS.

SPEECH THE THIRD.

ON THE ESTATE OF NICOSTRATUS.

THE ARGUMENT.

NICOSTRATUS dying in a foreign country, Hagnon and Hagnotheus, his first cousins, contend for the right of succession to his estate against Chariades, who claims under a will. This speech is by some supposed to have been delivered by Isæus in his own person as next friend to the young men, whose cause he supported; but Reiske well observes, that no argument in favour of this opinion can be drawn conclusively from the opening of the speech; since the words my intimate friends might have been used by any other speaker.

SPEECH THE THIRD:

Hagnon and Hagnotheus against Chariades.

SINCE Hagnon and Hagnotheus, judges, are iny intimate friends, and their father long ago was clofely connected with me, it will become me to defend them with the best of my abilities: now as neither of them has ever been out of Attica, it will not be poffible for them to come prepared with evidence of transactions in foreign parts, nor easy to confute their opponents, if they should tell a fictitious story; but what has paffed in our own country will, in my opinion, afford a fufficient proof, that all they, who claim the fortune of Nicoftratus as legatees, aim only at deluding and infulting

you.

First then, judges, it will be proper for you to confider the difference of the names in our respective bills of complaint, and to determine which claim has been made more naturally and with more fimplicity; for Hagnon and Hagno→ theus have alledged in their bill that Nicostratus was the fon of Thrafymachus, and declare that they are his coufins, both which allegations they prove by witneffes; but Chariades and his