Book 4
pr.29
For when they speak for the prosecution they introduce both a statement of facts, as if they were speaking first, and a refutation of the arguments for the defence, as if they were replying: and they are right in so doing. For since declamation is merely an exercise in forensic pleading, why should they not qualify themselves to speak either first or second See note prefixed to Index. ? Those however who do not understand the reason for such a practice, think that when they appear in the courts they should stick to the custom of the schools with which they have become familiar.
pr.30
But even scholastic rhetoricians occasionally substitute a brief summary for the full statement of the facts. For what statement of the case can be made when a wife is accusing a jealous husband of maltreating her, or a father is indicting his son turned Cynic before the censors for indecent behaviour See Index, s. v. Cynicus. ? In both cases the charge can be sufficiently indicated by one word placed in any part of the speech. But enough of these points.
