It has been remarked by Stallbaum that Plato had a twofold design in
this Dialogue; one, and that the primary one, to free Socrates from the
imputation of having attempted to corrupt the Athenian youth; the other,
to establish the principle that under all circumstances it is the duty
of a good citizen to obey the laws of his country. These two points,
however, are so closely interwoven with each other, that the general
principle appears only to be illustrated by the example of Socrates.
Crito was one of those friends of Socrates who had been present at his
trial and had offered to assist in paying a fine, had a fine been
imposed instead of the sentence of death. He appears to have frequently
visited his friend in prison after his condemnation, and now, having
obtained access to his cell very early in the morning, finds him
composed in a quiet sleep. He brings intelligence that the ship, the
arrival of which would be the signal for his death on the following day,
is expected to arrive forthwith, and takes occasion to entreat Socrates
to make his escape, the means of which were already prepared. Socrates
thereupon, having promised to follow the advice of Crito, if after the
matter had been fully discussed it should appear to be right to do so,
proposes to consider the duty of a citizen towards his country, and
having established the divine principle, that it is wrong to return evil
for evil, goes on to shew that the obligations of a citizen to his
country are even more binding than those of a child to its parent or a
slave to his master, and that therefore it is his duty to obey the
established laws, at whatever cost to himself.
At length Crito admits that he has no answer to make, and Socrates
resolves to submit himself to the will of Providence.