Institutio Oratoria

The case is similar in accusations of forgery: for either there are several accused or only

one. The writer of a document always regards it as necessary to support the signatory, but the signatory does not always support the writer of the document, for it is always possible that he has been deceived on the matter. [*]( The writer will always support the signatory's statement that he signed the document. The signatory will not always support the writer; e. g. he may not know the nature of the document which he signed. ) On the other hand, the man who is said to have called in their services, and for whom the document is alleged to have been written, will always defend both writer and signatories. The arguments employed in cases of treason or attempted tyranny will be drawn from the same sources.

But the custom prevalent in the schools of regarding everything not definitely stated in the theme as being in the speaker's favour, [*](cp. IV. ii. 28. As the examples which follow show, the declaimer assumes that his imaginary opponent has no good evidence to support his case: i.e. no witness, no informer, no weapons, no bodyguard. ) is likely to prove harmful to students destined for practice in the courts. You bring a charge of adultery.

Who is your witness? who is your informer?

You charge me with treason.

What was my reward? who was my accomplice?

You charge me with poisoning.

Where did I buy the poison, and from whom? When did I buy it, what was the price, and whom did I employ to administer it?

Or in defence of one charged with attempting to establish himself as tyrant, the declaimer will cry,

Where are my weapons, and what bodyguards have I ever collected?