"As John is now once again in my thoughts, I would like to take this opportunity to address a current irritation of mine. It has come to my attention that my former helpmate has recently been cast in an unfair light by both dramatists and so-called mystery novelists. These individuals of dubious repute, whose names are not worthy of mention here, have sought to portray him as little more than an oafish, blundering fool. Nothing could be further from reality. The very notion that I would burden myself with a slow-witted companion might be humorous in a theatrical context, but I regard such forms of insinuation as a serious insult to John and to me. It is possible that some error of representation could have stemmed from his writings, for he was always generous in overstating my abilities, while, at the same time, treating his own remarkable characteristics with tremendous modesty. Even so, the man I worked beside displayed a native shrewdness and an innate cunningness which was invaluable to our investigations. I do not deny his sporadic inability to grasp an obvious conclusion or to choose a best course of action, but rarely was he unintelligent in his opinions and conclusions. Above all that, it was my pleasure to spend my younger days in the company of one who could sense adventure in the most mundane of cases, and who, with his customary humour, patience, and loyalty, indulged the eccentricities of a frequently disagreeable friend. Therefore, if the pundits are honestly inclined to pick the most foolish of the pair, then I believe, without question, they should bestow the dishonour on me alone."