Page:Philological Museum v2.djvu/589

Socrates, Schleiermacher, and Delbrueck. 579 institutions, and of making them prone to violence. Mr Ast, however, puts a most singular construction on this charge He thinks it was meant particularly to refer to Alcibiades, and that the offense of which Socrates had been guilty with respect to him in the eyes of the Athenians, was that of rivalling them in his affections, and attempting to withdraw him from public affairs to philosophical contemplation. In this sense he was accused of seducing and corrupting their youth. An- other branch of the same charge was, as Mr Ast infers from a passage in the Gorgias (521 A. 522 A.), that Socrates per- plexed the understanding of his young hearers by his subtilties. That the defense in the Apology does not expressly meet the charge in this sense, must be acknowledged. But it re- mains to be proved, or rendered probable, that Socrates so understood it. What Xenophon specifies was probably al- ledged by the prosecutors in explanation and support of the more general terms of the indictment. Whether they put the same construction with Mr Ast on the intimacy between Socrates and Alcibiades, we are not informed. If they did, it would be a surprising coincidence. But the main question is, whether Mr Ast is correct in his assertion, which is in substance the same with Mr Delbrueck's, that the Apology does not go to the point, but leaves this part of the accusation unrefuted. And here it must be admitted, that to a certain degree both have truth on their side : for the passage which they single out, as containing the pith of the argument, is certainly not a satisfactory plea. But on the other hand, why are we bound to consider it by itself, and to stake this part of the cause upon it ? If the questions put to Meletus answer no other purpose than that of perplexing him, and Socrates had been satisfied with this triumph over his adversary, and had said nothing further on the subject, he would indeed have evaded the charge instead of refuting it. But if he has on the whole completely vindicated himself, what right have we to complain because in this particular passage he has directed his aim more toward the person than the case.? Now the real and 5 Mr Ast finds an aUusion to this charge in the Politicus p. 296. C. D. E. 297. A. because it is there argued that a statesman is justified in using compulsion for beneficial purposes, even against the letter of the laws . Vol. II. No. 6. 4 E