“I don’t agree that equity has anything to do with the case,” observed the Colonel at length. “It seems to me that Botha’s point settles it, and that the ball must be played from the place where the dog allowed it to come to rest. I don’t think Dr. Jim wins the hole at all. Rule 22 governs the case partly but not entirely. By the way, Septimus, when we turn up rules to settle these cases, I think you should only look at those affecting the one in hand, and not at other rules which have a bearing on the case you are to present. You have had your ten minutes’ study, you know. Now it is clear that the ball was in motion when the dog seized it, and if the dog then took it direct to the hole it all counted in the stroke. This case does not come within the clause about the ball lodging in anything moving, because the dog was not moving when it seized the ball. Once the dog let the ball stop on the green the stroke was ended. Therefore it is evidently a question as to whether it allowed it to come to rest or not, and Botha’s evidence settles the matter. What do you say, William?” “I entirely agree,” responded the M.P. “And you, Jim?” “I agree,” said the Author. “I trust we can count on your support, Septimus?” said the Colonel, looking across towards the Parson. “Oh, certainly,” he replied. “Gentlemen,” said the Colonel in his most official manner, “it is determined that Dr. Jameson did not hole out with that stroke. I am informed that they putted out afterwards, each in one more, and therefore the hole was halved. Now, my literary friend, will you kindly present your case?” The Author thereupon advanced his queer case as follows: