ounsel in public and private deliberations if
ignorant of the many things which happen together particularly to the
establishment of the State? And must he not falsely aver himself to be
the patron of the causes he undertakes, if obliged to borrow from
another what is of greatest consequence in these causes, in some measure
like those who repeat the writings of poets? And how will he accomplish
what he has so undertaken if the things which he requires the judge to
believe, he shall speak on the faith of another, and if he, the reputed
helper of his clients, shall himself stand in need of the help of
another?

THOROUGH INFORMATION INDISPENSABLE

But we will suppose him not reduced to this inconvenience, having
studied his cause sufficiently at home, and having thoroughly informed
himself of all that he has thought proper to lay before the judges: yet
what shall become of him when unforeseen questions arise, which often
are suddenly started on the back of pleadings? Will he not with great
unseemliness look about him? Will he not ask the lower class of
advocates how he shall behave? Can he be accurate in comprehending the
things then whispered to him, when he is to speak on them instantly?
Can he strongly affirm, or speak ingenuously for his clients? Grant that
he may in his pleadings, but what shall be his fate in altercation, when
he must have his answer ready and he has no time for receiving
information? And what if a person learned in the law is not assisting?
What if one who knows little of the matter tells him something that is
wrong? And this is the greatest mischief in ignorance, to believe such a
monitor intelligent.

Now, as we suppose the orator to be a particularly learned and honest
man, when he has made sufficient study of that which naturally is best,
it will give him little trouble if a lawyer dissents from him in
opinion, since even they are admitted to be of different opinions among
themselves. But if he desires to know their sentiments on any point of
law, he need only read a little, which is the least laborious part of
study. If many men who despaired of acquiring the necessary talents for
speaking in public, have engaged in the study of law, with how much more
ease will the orator effect this, which may be learned by those who from
their own confession could not be orators?

M. Cato was as much distinguished by his great eloquence as by his great
learning in the law. Scaevola and Servius Sulpitiu