In J.B. Priestley’s *An Inspector Calls*, Gerald Croft is portrayed as an unjust character whose actions and attitudes reveal the selfishness and moral failings of the privileged upper class in Edwardian society. Set in 1912 but written in 1945, the play critiques social inequality and the lack of responsibility among the wealthy. Through Gerald’s exploitative relationship with Eva Smith, his denial of guilt, resistance to change, and embodiment of class privilege, Priestley uses realistic dialogue and subtle figurative language to expose Gerald’s injustice. This essay will argue that Priestley presents Gerald as unjust by highlighting his exploitation, denial, resistance, and class hypocrisy, using language and dramatic techniques to reinforce these traits. Priestley presents Gerald as unjust through his exploitative and patronizing treatment of Eva Smith, which reflects upper-class abuse of power. Gerald’s admission, “I didn’t feel about her as she felt about me,” uses plain, emotive language to reveal his emotional detachment and selfishness, emphasizing the one-sided nature of their relationship. Additionally, Gerald refers to Eva as “a girl of that class,” a euphemistic phrase that distances her and highlights his class prejudice . This phrase acts as a subtle metaphor for social division, underscoring how Gerald dehumanizes Eva by reducing her to a social stereotype. Priestley’s use of understated, realistic dialogue here exposes Gerald’s callousness and the systemic injustice faced by working-class women exploited by wealthy men. Gerald’s denial and evasion of responsibility further mark him as unjust, shown through his defensive and contradictory language. When confronted, Gerald insists, “I insisted on giving her money,” using imperatives that imply power and control rather than genuine charity. This monetary transaction is a euphemism for his attempt to buy Eva’s silence and loyalty, highlighting his exploitation. Yet he also says, “I was sorry for her,” a stammered, fragmented admission (“Sorry - I - well, I've suddenly realised - taken it in properly - that she's dead”) that Priestley punctuates with hyphens to reveal Gerald’s internal conflict and suppressed emotion. This contrast between forceful language and hesitant speech illustrates Gerald’s struggle between superficial remorse and self-preservation. Priestley uses this tension to critique the upper class’s tendency to avoid true accountability, revealing Gerald’s unjust nature. Priestley uses Gerald’s language and actions to show his resistance to social change, reinforcing his injustice. After the Inspector’s departure, Gerald dismissively suggests the visit “might have been a hoax,” using speculative language to undermine the Inspector’s moral authority. This euphemistic dismissal reveals Gerald’s desire to evade responsibility and maintain social order. Furthermore, Gerald tells Sheila, “Everything’s all right now, Sheila,” as he offers her the engagement ring again, employing reassuring, almost patronizing language that attempts to restore normality and silence criticism. Priestley’s use of cyclical structure-ending the play with Gerald’s offer-symbolizes the upper class’s refusal to learn or change. Gerald’s language here reflects his superficiality and unwillingness to confront social injustice, reinforcing his unjust character. Gerald’s character also embodies the entitlement and hypocrisy of the upper class, which Priestley presents through both description and dialogue. Gerald is introduced as “an easy well-bred young man-about-town,” an idiomatic phrase loaded with connotations of privilege and carefree indulgence. This phrase metaphorically foreshadows Gerald’s unfaithfulness, as “going about town” implies a lifestyle of casual affairs. Additionally, his engagement to Sheila Birling, “the daughter of a prosperous manufacturer,” highlights the social importance of wealth and status over morality. Gerald’s polished, diplomatic language, including euphemisms like “a little relaxation” for his affair, reveals his desire to maintain appearances and avoid scandal. Priestley uses this refined but evasive language to expose Gerald’s hypocrisy and the injustice embedded in class privilege. In conclusion, Priestley presents Gerald Croft as an unjust character through his exploitation of Eva Smith, denial of responsibility, resistance to social change, and embodiment of class privilege. Through realistic dialogue, euphemisms, metaphorical language, and dramatic structure, Priestley reveals Gerald’s selfishness, hypocrisy, and moral blindness. Gerald’s character serves as a critique of the Edwardian upper class and a warning about the dangers of ignoring social responsibility. His failure to learn from the Inspector’s message underscores the urgent need for a more just and compassionate society.