(Comments of the I.B.H. "Bosh! 'Honest JOHN' is a shrew, and not a Practical Pug. Is one prizefighter never to criticise another's style because he's once been in the same Company with him? Might as well say he must therefore never improve his own style. Besides, any stick is good enough to beat the Grand Old Pug-dog with!")
III.—Rejoinder of the "Brummagem Bantam."
"'Itting below the belt be jolly well blowed! Honest JOHN don't believe a word 'e sez—it's ony his narsty spite. Makes hisself the wiaduck for the 'Arwarden Gang's witrol and winegar, e' do. In course I wos one o' the Old 'Un's Company, wus luck! But I've larned a bit since then. Wot do you think? When I larruped my old pals, and called 'em mugs, messers, and muddlers, in corse I included myself, tacit-like. But there was no call for to say so! As to not showing of 'em up acos I wos one of 'em—Walker!!! If that's the Newcastle Nobbler's 'theory' of fair-play, 'e may jest go 'ome and eat coke!"
(Comments of the I.B.H. "The B.B. is quite right. If a Pug may not round on his old pals for doing what he helped them to do, it follows that he himself must never try to do better. Which is absurd! Go it, JOE!")
IV.—Surrejoinder from "Honest JOHN."
"My 'theory' ain't a bit wot the B.B. says it is. My 'theory' is that it's mean, and unfair, and unperfessional to curry favour with one's present backers by 'olding hup one's old pals to public redicule for doing wot we 'elped 'em to do, and at the time praised 'em for doin'. I call that 'hitting below the belt!' And I believe every 'onest and manly Pug from FIGG to SAYERS would ha' said ditter to ''Onest JOHN.' That's all, Gemmen!"
(Comment of the I.B.H. "Bosh! JOE's style of hitting is no doubt uncomfortable—for the Old 'Un and his pals. THAT'S EXACTLY WHY WE LIKE IT! What's the use of hitting above the belt only when the foe's only vulnerable below it? We rejoice to see the B.B. knocking the sawdust out of the Grand Old Fistic Fetish, and squelching the cant and claptrap out of 'Honest JOHN.'")