The so-called decision of Rhadamanthus is worthy of all admiration.He knew that the men of his own time believed and had no doubt that there were Gods,which was a reasonable belief in those days,because most men were the sons of Gods,and according to tradition he was one himself.He appears to have thought that he ought to commit judgment to no man,but to the Gods only,and in this way suits were simply and speedily decided by him.For he made the two parties take an oath respecting the points in dispute,and so got rid of the matter speedily and safely.But now that a certain portion of mankind do not believe at all in the existence of the Gods,and others imagine that they have no care of us,and the opinion of most men,and of the men,is that in return for small sacrifice and a few flattering words they will be their accomplices in purloining large sums and save them from many terrible punishments,the way of Rhadamanthus is no longer suited to the needs of justice;for as the needs of men about the Gods are changed,the laws should also be changed;-in the granting of suits a rational legislation ought to do away with the oaths of the parties on either side-he who obtains leave to bring an action should write,down the charges,but should not add an oath;and the defendant in like manner should give his denial to the magistrates in writing,and not swear;for it is a dreadful thing to know,when many lawsuits are going on in a state that almost half the people who meet one another quite unconcernedly at the public meals and in other companies and relations of private life are perjured.Let the law,then,be as follows:-A judge who is about to give judgment shall take an oath,and he who is choosing magistrates for the state shall either vote on oath or with a voting tablet which he brings from a temple;so too the judge of dances and of all music,and the superintendents and umpires of gymnastic and equestrian contests,and any matters in which,as far as men can judge,there is nothing to be gained by a false oath;but all cases in which a denial confirmed by an oath clearly results in a great advantage to the taker of the oath,shall be decided without the oath of the parties to the suit,and the presiding judges shall not permit either of them.to use an oath for the sake of persuading,nor to call down curses on himself and his race,nor to use unseemly supplications or womanish laments.But they shall ever be teaching and learning what is just in auspicious words;and he who does otherwise shall be supposed to speak beside the point,and the judges shall again bring him back to the question at issue.On the other hand,strangers in their dealings with strangers shall as at present have power to give and receive oaths,for they will not often grow old in the city or leave a fry of young ones like themselves to be the sons and heirs of the land.
As to the initiation of private suits,let the manner of deciding causes between all citizens be the same as in cases in which any freeman is disobedient to the state in minor matters,of which the penalty is not stripes,imprisonment,or death.But as regards attendance at choruses or processions or other shows,and as regards public services,whether the celebration of sacrifice in peace,or the payment of contributions in war-in all these cases,first comes the necessity of providing remedy for the loss;and by those who will not obey,there shall be security given to the officers whom the city and the law empower to exact the sum due;and if they forfeit their security,let the goods which they have pledged be,and the money given to the city;but if they ought to pay a larger sum,the several magistrates shall impose upon the disobedient a suitable penalty,and bring them before the court,until they are willing to do what they are ordered.
Now a state which makes money from the cultivation of the soil only,and has no foreign trade,must consider what it will do about the emigration of its own people to other countries,and the reception of strangers from elsewhere.About these matters the legislator has to consider,and he will begin by trying to persuade men as far as he can.The intercourse of cities with one another is apt to create a confusion of manners;strangers,are always suggesting novelties to strangers.When states are well governed by good laws the mixture causes the greatest possible injury;but seeing that most cities are the reverse of well-ordered,the confusion which arises in them from the reception of strangers,and from the citizens themselves rushing off into other cities,when any one either young or old desires to travel anywhere abroad at whatever time,is of no consequence.On the other hand,the refusal of states to receive others,and for their own citizens never to go to other places,is an utter impossibility,and to the rest of the world is likely to appear ruthless and uncivilized;it is a practise adopted by people who use harsh words,such as xenelasia or banishment of strangers,and who have harsh and morose ways,as men think.And to be thought or not to be thought well of by the rest of the world is no light matter;for the many are not so far wrong in their judgment of who are bad and who are good,as they are removed from the nature of virtue in themselves.Even bad men have a divine instinct which guesses rightly,and very many who are utterly depraved form correct notions and judgments of the differences between the good and bad.And the generality of cities are quite right in exhorting us to value a good reputation in the world,for there is no truth greater and more important than this-that he who is really good (I am speaking of the man who would be perfect)seeks for reputation with,but not without,the reality of goodness.And our Cretan colony ought also to acquire the fairest and noblest reputation for virtue from other men;and there is every reason to expect that,if the reality answers to the idea,she will before of the few well-ordered cities which the sun and the other Gods behold.
