nt! Mr. Pickwick
refused to pay them--why should not she? The poor woman had "blabbed" to
Sam, a careless and natural assurance of theirs, that they would be
content to get them from Mr. Pickwick--a thing many a firm would do. But
Perker here sees a regular conspiracy. "I cannot undertake to say
whether the wording of the cognovit, the nature of the ostensible
consideration and the proof we can get together about the whole conduct
of the suit, _will be sufficient to justify an indictment for
conspiracy_."

It is impossible to understand this bit of legal jargon. "The wording of
the cognovit"--one could speculate on _that_ without seeing it. (2) "The
nature of the ostensible consideration" was not far to seek--it being
work and labour done for the Plaintiff. And again, supposing they had
promised her to get them solely from Mr. Pickwick--Sam's revelation of
this, in open court, and its reception with laughter, showed what was
thought of it. So which of the two courses were they to adopt? (3) And
"the proof we may get together about the whole conduct of the suit."
This "whole conduct" was perfectly regular. So the Judge thought--so did
the jury. The case was proved by Pickwick's own friends. As we know,
however, the firm took no steps to obtain satisfaction, but there cannot
be the slightest doubt that they would have "recovered damages." We
doubt if Mr. Pickwick would have gone to the Fleet for the second time
rather than pay.

Perker's suspicions as to the _Cognovit_ obtained by Dodson and Fogg were
shrewd, and certain enough, though he could not have seen the document.
The suspicions were well warranted by the state of the Law, which became
an instrument in the hands of grasping attorneys. By it the client was
made to sign an acknowledgment, and offering no defence to a supposed
action,--say for costs--brought against him, Judgment was then marked.

This offered a great temptation to the unscrupulous. Mrs. Bardell, no
doubt, signed with light heart, not knowing what she was doing, and being
told that it was merely a matter of form. Various enactments attempted
to protect the client--one being passed some four or five years before
the trial Bardell v. Pickwick, requiring the _Cognovit_ to be regularly
filed within twenty-one days; more than ten years later it was required,
that the client's signing such a thing should have no force in Law,
unless he was represented by another solicitor.

The matter,