XLV.  But those which are brought forward as necessary, if they are only imitations of a necessary kind of argumentation and are not so in reality, may be reprehended in this manner.  In the first place, the summing up, which ought to take away the force of the admissions you have made if it be a correct one, will never be reprehended, if it be an incorrect one it may be attacked by two methods, either by conversion or by the invalidating one portion of it.  By conversion, in this way.

  “For if the man be modest, why should you
  Attack so good a man?  And if his heart
  And face be seats of shameless impudence,
  Then what avails your accusation
  Of one who views all fame with careless eye?”

In this case, whether you say that he is a modest man or that he is not, he thinks that the unavoidable inference is that you should not accuse him.  But that may be reprehended by conversion thus—­“But indeed, he ought to be accused, for if he be modest, accuse him, for he will not treat your imputations against him lightly, but if he has a shameless disposition of mind, still accuse him, for in that case he is not a respectable man.”

And again, the argument may be reprehended by an invalidating of the other part of it—­“But if he is a modest man, when he has been corrected by your accusation he will abandon his error.”  An enumeration of particulars is understood to be faulty if we either say that something has been passed over which we are willing to admit, or if some weak point has been included in it which can be contradicted, or if there is no reason why we may not honestly admit it.  Something is passed over in such an enumeration as this.—­“Since you have that horse, you must either have bought it, or have acquired it by inheritance, or have received it as a gift, or he must have been born on your estate, or, if none of these alternatives of the case, you must have stolen it.  But you did not buy it, nor did it come to you by inheritance, nor was it foaled on your estate, nor was it given to you as a present, therefore you must certainly have stolen it.”

This enumeration is fairly reprehended, if it can be alleged that the horse was taken from the enemy, as that description of booty is not sold.  And if that be alleged, the enumeration is disproved, since that matter has been stated which was passed over in such enumeration.

XLVI.  But it will also be reprehended in another manner, if any contradictory statement is advanced; that is to say, just by way of example, if, to continue arguing from the previous case, it can be shown that the horse did come to one by inheritance, or if it should not be discreditable to admit the last alternative, as if a person, when his adversaries said,—­“You were either laying an ambush against the owner, or you were influenced by a friend, or you were carried away by covetousness,” were to confess that he was complying with the entreaties of his friend.