§ 18. The plaintiff himself, by omitting my name in his action against Evergus, is a witness that he has no claim against me. The charge is the same; and if both had been guilty, both would have been prosecuted. But, the case having been tried once, the law forbids it to be tried again.
οὐ γὰρ ἂν κ.τ.λ. ‘For surely, if, for the same wrongs, he had the same charge to bring against both, when both were present, he would not have passed over the one, and gone to law with the other.’]
ὅτι γ᾽ οὐκ ἐῶσιν—τουτονί. Or. 38 § 4 ὅτι δ᾽ οὐκ ἐῶσιν οἱ νόμοι περὶ τῶν οὕτω πραχθέντων αὖθις δικάζεσθαι, νομίζω μὲν ἄπαντας ὑμᾶς είδέναι, κἂν μηδὲν εἴπω περὶ αὐτῶν ἐγὼ, βούλομαι δ̓ ὅμως καὶ τὸν νόμον ὑμῖν αὐτὸν ἀναγνῶναι.
τῶν οὕτω πραχθέντων When a legal discharge and acquittance has been given.
καὶ μηδὲν είπόντος i.e. κἂν ἐγὼ μηδὲν εἴπω.
καὶ τὸν νόμον Either ‘beside my assertion of the fact,’ or ‘beside the evidence read before.’
