In Act 2, the trial of Kent for plain speaking is an excuse for Cornwall and Reagan to exercise power in an arrogant way. Lear's mock trial of Goneril and Regan is presided over by a lunatic and attended by a fake madman and a court jester, his “all-licensed fool”, his “boy”. The trial is a parody of the love-test in act one scene 1. It highlights the absurdity of Lear's actions in the aforementioned scene, where “Lear is mad”. It also undermines all other trials carried out by authority figures in King Lear. Gloucester’s blinding is an appalling example of human injustice, it is not he who deserves such a misfortune, he has “sent the lunatic King…to Dover”, which in his mind is still serving his old King and is thus not “treacherous”.
Cornwall and Regan pervert the law to satisfy their own craving for revenge. It is possible to see the battle between the French and the English forces as another trial, which has dire consequences. Cordelia is hanged in prison and Lear dies. Some see Cordelia's death as the greatest injustice in the play. Human judgement and the justice system look extremely fallible when the curtain goes down on act 5.
This point is reinforced by the examples of “natural” or poetic justice that we see in the play. In act 5 scene 3, Edgar takes the law into his own hands when he challenges Edmund. This is 'wild justice' at work. However, as the reader, we accept the outcome of the duel as appropriate. Edmund deserves to die; Edgar states, “if [his] speech offend a noble heart, thy arm may do thee justice”.
We see poetic justice at work elsewhere; Cornwall is turned on and killed by his own servant, Goneril and Regan are destroyed by their jealous lust, Regan has a “full-flowing stomach”, and Oswald meats a sticky end when Edgar “hast slain” him, yet once dead, the ever “loyal” servant of Goneril, Oswald, will not be missed by anyone, he is but an extension of his Mistress, who is herself is a hideous person.
The thorniest question about justice concerns Gloucester and Lear. The necessity for their death, it can be said, is questionable. Some may say that a rather harsh kind of justice is at work here. Edgar suggests this when he says to Edmund “the dark and vicious place where thee he got cost him his eyes”. Gloucester pays very dearly for his sins (although some Elizabethans believed that blinding was the appropriate punishment for adultery). Lear also pays for his sins, Cordelia is taken from him immediately after he recognises her merits, this is too much for the already maddened King, his “poor fool is hanged” meaning his daughter, as it was a term of endearment. Yet this term indeed remembers Lear’s other favourite, his “Fool”. This double reference leads us to believe that Lear has lost his two dearest. We can now ask, is this not justice enough? Lear has now lost all that originally was dear to him, and all that he was taught was dear to him during his moments of madness. Although his judgement has been restores, it is too late for the monarch Lear.
King Lear is also concerned with social justice. Lear and Gloucester both consider this topic carefully and seem to reach radical conclusions. Gloucester calls upon the heavens to distribute wealth more evenly; while Lear considers the lives of “poor naked wretches” he paid so little attention to. In Act 4, Lear rages against corrupt members of the judiciary and seems to sneer at himself when he says “a dog's obeyed in office”.
At the end of the play we are presented with two new agents of justice, Albany, and Edgar. We accept the justice of their actions in Act 5 Scene 3. But human judgement still looks faulty. Albany has been overwhelmed by events and Edgar’s bitter words about Gloucester’s death seem callous. Surely nobody in King Lear is morally impeccable? Perhaps Shakespeare wants us to remain uncomfortable about justice.
