rised with his landlady in his arms; (2)
That he had been corresponding with her on most familiar terms--at least
Serjeant Buzfuz had made it appear so; (3) Language that _almost_
amounted to a proposal had been overheard; (4) And finally, it had been
revealed that the Defendant had been "caught" in a lady's bedroom, at an
Inn, at midnight! To answer which a "strong" case was absolutely
essential. This, we grieve to say, was not forthcoming.

THE DEFENDANT'S CASE.

When we listen to the defence set up for Mr. Pickwick we have to lament
that that worthy gentleman was not better served by his legal advisers.

On the other side the shrewd Dodson and Fogg had done admirably for their
client. They were sharp clever attornies, having a thundering,
overpowering leader, and a smart, exceedingly smart junior, one of those
"wide-awake" brisk fellows who really conduct the case, and will "take
silk" in a few years. This gentleman could cross-examine in capital
style and address the jury in a language of his own, by glances, shrugs,
and remarks addressed to a witness, but intended for the jury, as they
knew perfectly well. His style, bearing, and speeches form an admirable
epitome of the arts and devices of a smart counsel. There are "common"
forms and Skimpin had them at his fingers' ends. As we listen, we feel
how admirably directed they were to work on the jury.

Perker's plan of campaign as announced to Mr. Pickwick, was a poor one
enough, and showed how desperate he thought the case was. "We have only
one (course) to adopt, my dear sir," he said, "cross-examine the
witnesses: trust to Snubbin's eloquence, throw dust in the eyes of the
judge, and ourselves on the jury." Brave words, but nothing of the
programme was carried out. The cross-examination of the witnesses was
but tamely attempted. Snubbin's eloquence was not displayed beyond
mildly praising his client's good character. As for "throwing dust in
the eyes of judge," we have seen Mr. Justice Stareleigh was much too wide
awake for that; while the throwing themselves on the jury was disastrous.
There were several other lines of defence which a more up-to-date
solicitor would not have overlooked. A less scrupulous man would have
made searching enquiries into Mrs. Bardell's history and character; but
his client, perhaps, would not have sanctioned this course.

Perker is even absurd enough to talk of a _casa_, as though it were some
Italian word.

A