SOCRATES AS A CROSS-EXAMINER. By O. F. Hershev. THE trial of Socrates, in which a poet, forgive the court for failing to appreciate his a politician, and a rhetorician appeared magnificent defense. There were two counts in the indictment for the prosecution, and a philosopher for the defense, can hardly be expected to offer against Socrates. The first charging him many suggestions to the legal profession. with not worshiping the gods of the Athen And yet there are few historic trials from ians, and introducing instead strange divini which lawyers can learn more. Socrates' de ties of his own; the second with corrupting fense of himself, as we gather it from Plato the youth. The penalty was death. This was the substance of the indictment and Xenophon, is certainly one of the finest specimens we have of forensic oratory. No presented by Miletus, and hung in front of the office of the acyav fJacrr/ftv, before trial lawyer of to-day, aided by the exam ples and experiences of over twenty cen "whom both the charge and the plea were turies, could hope to improve upon it. It is sworn to. The prosecution was conducted easily as eloquent as Demosthenes, and as by Miletus, Antynus, and Lycon — the three ingenious as Cicero. The arrangement of witnesses on the back of the indictment. his plea is perfect. All the facts and argu The former was an insignificant young tragic ments are masterfully marshaled, and every poet who opened and conducted the case doubt and prejudice of the court is carefully for the state, and represented the technical anticipated and allayed. The bit of cross- charge or indictment proper. Of the two examination he indulged in repays study; latter Antynus alone was of any conse and some of our modern forensic bullies quence. He was a rich radical who hated might do well to compare their methods Socrates probably for mere personal rea with that of Socrates. One trembles at the sons, but made his attack under cover of thought of what Sir Edward Clarke or Sir defending the democracy; and throughout Charles Russell, for instance, would do in the defense he is treated with sublime dis these days with a witness like Miletus; and dain. compared with their methods, Socrates cer The Heliastic court before whom the trial tainly had cross-examination down to a fine took place consisted of probably over five art. hundred judges; and in addition there was That his defense was unsuccessful was cer a large audience of Athenians. Socrates, tainly not the fault of the lawyer who con after the manner of Demosthenes in his ora ducted it, though it may have been due to tion on the Crown, introduces the technical the fact that he had a fool for a client. In part of the defense in the middle and most deed, it was Socrates' great boast that his obscure part of his speech, and leads up to superior wisdom consisted in recognizing it by a shrewd attempt to allay the popular himself to be a fool, while all his neighbors prejudice against him as a reputed philos foolishly imagined themselves wise; and he opher and sophist, and to win over the court admits that he was kept so busy going about, to some appreciation of the motives that have animated his whole life. Coming to telling people what ineffable fools they there fore were, that he had no time for his own the indictment proper, he determines to slur business. Under the circumstances one can it over by putting Miletus, its framer, upon
