On Benefits Chapter 8

Itaque non haec parum idonea res visa est, quae deduceretur ad iudicem, sed nemo huic rei satis idoneus iudex inventus est ; quod non admiraberis, si excusseris, quid habiturus fuerit difficultatis, quisquis in eiusmodi reum exisset. Donavit aliquis magnam pecuniam, sed dives, sed non sensurus impendium ; donavit alius, sed toto patrimonio cessurus. Summa eadem est, beneficium idem non est. Etiamnunc adice : hic pecuniam pro addicto dependit, sed cum illam domo protulisset; ille dedit eandem, sed mutuam sumpsit aut rogavit et se obligari ingenti merito passus est. Eodem existimas loco esse illum, qui beneficium ex facili largitus est, et hunc, qui accepit, ut daret ? Tempore quaedam magna fiunt, non summa. Beneficium est donata possessio, cuius fertilitas laxare possit annonam, beneficium est unus in fame panis ; beneficium est donare regiones, per quas magna flumina et navigabilia decurrant, beneficium est arentibus siti et vix spiritum per siccas fauces ducentibus monstrare fontem. Quis inter se ista comparabit ? Quis expendet ? Difficilis est sententia, quae non rem, sed vim rei quaerit ; eadem licet sint, aliter data non idem pendent. Dedit hic mihi beneficium, sed non libenter, sed dedisse se questus est, sed superbius me, quam solebat, adspexit, sed tam tarde dedit, ut plus praestaturus fuerit, si cito negasset. Horum quomodo iudex inibit aestimationem, cum sermo et dubitatio et vultus meriti gratiam destruant ?

Ingratitude, therefore, is not only matter unfit to be brought into court, but no judge could be found fit to try it; and this you will not be surprised at, if you examine the difficulties of any one who should attempt to prosecute a man upon such a charge. One man may have given a large sum of money, but he is rich and would not feel it; another may have given it at the cost of his entire inheritance. The sum given is the same in each case, but the benefit conferred is not the same. Add another instance: suppose that to redeem a debtor from slavery one man paid money from his own private means, while another man paid the same sum, but had to borrow it or beg for it, and allow himself to be laid under a great obligation to some one; would you rank the man who so easily bestowed his benefit on an equality with him who was obliged to receive a benefit himself before he could bestow it? Some benefits are great, not because of their amount, but because of the time at which they are bestowed; it is a benefit to give an estate whose fertility can bring down the price of corn, and it is a benefit to give a loaf of bread in time of famine; it is a benefit to give provinces through which flow vast navigable rivers, and it is a benefit, when men are parched with thirst, and can scarcely draw breath through their dry throats, to show them a spring of water. Who will compare these cases with one another, or weigh one against the other? It is hard to give a decision when it is not the thing given, but its meaning, which has to be considered; though what is given is the same, yet if it be given under different circumstances it has a different value. A man may have bestowed a benefit upon me, but unwillingly; he may have complained of having given it; he may have looked at me with greater haughtiness than he was wont to do; he may have been so slow in giving it, that he would have done me a greater service if he had promptly refused it. How could a judge estimate the value of these things, when words, hesitation, or looks can destroy all their claim to gratitude?

Ce n’est donc pas que la question ait semblé peu digne d’être déférée au juge ; c’est qu’on n’a point trouvé de juge capable de l’apprécier. Et tu n’en seras pas surpris, si tu pèses bien ce que présenterait de difficulté toute cause de cette nature. Tel m’a donné une forte somme, mais il est riche : le sacrifice pour lui est insensible. Tel autre m’a donné autant, mais il y perd tout son patrimoine. Si la somme est la même, quelle différence dans le bienfait ! Second exemple : un homme paye pour un débiteur adjugé à son créancier, mais il avait l’argent chez lui ; un autre avance la même somme, mais il l’a empruntée, ou sollicitée, il a consenti à se charger d’une lourde obligation. Mettras-tu sur la même ligne l’auteur d’une largesse qui ne l’a point gêné et l’homme qui s’est endetté pour donner ? Souvent c’est la circonstance, non la somme, qui fait la grandeur du bienfait. C’en est un que le don d’une terre capable par sa fertilité de remédier à la disette d’un pays ; c’en est un que le morceau de pain offert à l’affamé. C’est un bienfait que la donation de vastes contrées traversées de rivières nombreuses et navigables ; c’en est un d’indiquer à l’homme consumé par la soif et qui tire à peine quelque souffle d’un gosier desséché la source qui le désaltérera. Qui comparera ces différences ? Qui les pèsera ? La décision est difficile, quand ce n’est pas la chose, mais son importance, qui est en question. Les dons fussent-ils les mêmes, si la façon de les faire est autre, ils n’ont plus le même poids. On m’a rendu service, mais de mauvaise grâce ; mais on a témoigné du regret de m’avoir servi, mais on m’a regardé avec plus de hauteur que de coutume : on m’a donné si tard qu’on m’eût obligé davantage par un prompt refus. Comment le juge entrera-t-il dans l’appréciation de ces services, quand le langage, l’hésitation, l’air du visage en détruisent le mérite ?