CHiX XI, EULES OF DEMOCKATIC GOVERNMENT. 445 which was above even the people. If they saw that the law was attacked, they stopped the orator in the midst of his discourse, and ordered the immediate dis- eohition of the assembly. The people separated with- out having a right to reach a vote.' There was a law, little applicable indeed, that pun- ished every orator convicted of having given the people bad advice. There was another that foibade access to the speaker's stand to any orator who had three tixnea advised resolutions contrary to the existing laws.* Athens knew very well that democracy could be sustained only by respect for the laws. The care of preparing the changes that it might be useful to propose belonged especially to the thesmothetao. Their propositions were presented to the senate, which had the right to reject, but not to convert them into laws. In case of approval the senate convoked the assembly, and presented the bill of the thesraothetas. But the people could decide nothing at once ; they put off the discussion to another day. Meanwhile they designated five orators, whose special mission should be to defend the existing laws, and to point out the inconveniences of the innovation proposed. On the day fixed the people again assembled and heard, first, the orators charged with the defence of the old laws, and afterwards those who supported the new. When speeches had been heard, the people did not decide yet. They contented themselves with naming a commission, very numerous, but composed exclusively of men who had held the oflice of judge. This commission returned to the cx- ' Polhix, VIII. 94. Philochorus, Fragm., coll. Didot, p. 407. » Athenacus, X. 73. Pollux, VIII. C2. Sec G. Perrot, Ilisi du droit public d'Athenes, ciiap. II.
