بریده‌هایی از کتاب Bardell v. Pickwick

It must be said that even in our day a defendant for Breach, with Mr. Pickwick’s story and surroundings, would have had small chance with a city jury.  They saw before them a benevolent-looking Lothario, of a Quaker-like air, while all the witnesses against him were his three most intimate friends and his own man.

It must be said that even in our day a defendant for Breach, with Mr. Pickwick’s story and surroundings, would have had small chance with a city jury.

From the general description in the text, it is evident Stareleigh was the prey of gouty affections—which swelled him into grotesque shape, and he found himself unequal to the office.

with what results Mr. Pickwick was to learn disastrously. It is curious, however, that the Chief Justice, in spite of his indisposition, should still be associated with the case; for he had tried the momentous case of Norton v. Melbourne, and had heard there letters read, which were parodied in the

a monster.”)  Mr. Skimpin’s gross insinuations, to wit, that Winkle was “telegraphing” to his friend, would have been summarily put down, and all “bullying” checked; more, he would have calmly kept Counsel’s attention to the issue.  This perfect impartiality would have made him show to the Jury how little evidence there was to support the plaintiff’s case.  Instead came this unlucky indisposition: and his place was taken by “my Brother