thoughtfully, and pulled out his watch.

Now to the superficial this seemed to be evaded by the art of the firm in
"getting the cognovit out of her." But this was an ordinary, vulgar
stroke--which anyone could have done. Their policy went far deeper, and
this Perker was acute enough to recognize. There was no object in
putting Mrs. Bardell into the Fleet.

They could no more get their costs out of her, than they could get them
out of Mr. Pickwick. She had nothing but her few "sticks" of furniture,
worth say 50 pounds. But the astute fellows saw what pressure could be
put on the benevolent nature of Mr. Pickwick, who could not endure that a
respectable woman should be exposed to the contamination of a debtor's
prison. And their sagacity was to be justified, and on the very next
day, too.

It is curious, however, that no mention is made of Mrs. Bardell's
release. It, of course, took place before Mr. Pickwick's. Here again
Dodson and Fogg behaved very fairly, for they allowed both her and Mr.
Pickwick to be released, without receiving payment, but simply on "an
understanding" by Perker. As it turned out, indeed, they were not paid
for some weeks.

The processes by which Mr. Pickwick was got into the Fleet were
complicated enough, _Habeas Corpus_, appearing before functionaries, etc.
But it is odd that in cases of persons of lower degree these seemed not
to be necessary. We do not hear of them in Sam's instance. While Mrs.
Bardell, was taken straight from "the Spaniards," to the prison door, she
was not even formally arrested by the Bailiff, though he was in
attendance. He sat afar off at Hampstead, taking his drink--and on the
box during the drive. She might be said to have been arbitrarily taken
to the prison by Jackson--without a legal warrant. Had not the business
been compromised, some other astute firm of attorneys might have found
subject for an action against Dodson and Fogg.

Another of the humorous incidents connected with the case is old Weller's
firm persuasion that Mr. Pickwick was to "stand his trial," as though he
were indicted for some criminal offence. We find him always astray as to
when he was to be "tried," etc. This is a most natural impression among
the lower classes, who are not very clear as to the distinction between
civil and criminal process, being most familiar with the latter. In the
same spirit is his humorous suggestion of securing an _alibi_, as the
best method of getti