Bt’s History
Who and what is this little dog that has forced his way by leaps and bounds from Boston town to the uttermost parts of this grand country, from the broad Atlantic to the Golden Gate, and from the Canadian border to the Gulf of Mexico? Nay, not content with this, but has overrun the imaginary borders north and south until he is fast becoming as great a favorite on the other side as here, and who promises in the near future, unless all signs fail, to cross all oceans, and extend his conquests wherever man is found that can appreciate beauty and fidelity in man’s best friend. What passports does he present that he should be entitled to the recognition that he has everywhere accorded him? A dog that has in 35 years or less so thoroughly established himself in the affections of the great body of the American people, so that his friends offer no apology whatever in calling him the American dog, must possess peculiar qualities that endear him to all classes and conditions of men, and I firmly believe that when all the fads for which his native city is so well known have died a natural death, he will be in the early bloom of youth. Yea, in the illimitable future, when the historian McCauley’s New Zealander is lamenting over the ruins of that marvelous city of London, he will be accompanied by a Boston terrier, who will doubtless be intelligent enough to share his grief. In reply to the query as to who and what he is, it will be readily recalled that on the birth of possibly the greatest poet the world has ever seen it was stated:
“The force of nature could no further go, To make a third, she joined the other two.” And this applies with equal force to the production of the Boston terrier. The two old standard breeds of world-wide reputation, the English bulldog and the bull terrier, had to be joined to make a third which we believe to be the peer of either, and the superior of both. The dog thus evolved possesses a type and individuality strictly his own, inherited from both sides of the house, and is a happy medium between these two grand breeds, possessing the best qualities of each. To some the name “terrier” would suggest the formation of the dog on approximate terrier lines, but this is as completely erroneous as to imagine that the dog should approach in like proportion to the bull type. When the dog was in its infancy it was frequently called the Boston bull, and then again the round-headed bull and terrier, and later, when the Boston Terrier Club was taken under the wings of the great A.K.C. in 1893, it became officially known as the Boston terrier.
There are several features that are characteristic of the dog that tend to its universal popularity—its attractive shape, style and size, its winning disposition, and its beautiful color and markings. From the bulldog he inherits a sweet, charming personality, quiet, restful demeanor, and an intense love of his master and home. He does not possess the restless, roving disposition which characterizes so many members of the terrier tribe, nor will he be found quarreling with other dogs. From the bull terrier side he inherits a lively mood, the quality of taking care of himself if attacked by another dog, and of his owner, too, if necessary, the propensity to be a great destroyer of all kinds of vermin if properly trained, and an ideal watch dog at night. No wonder he is popular, he deserves to be. The standard describes him as follows:
“The general appearance of the Boston terrier is that of a smooth, short-coated, compactly built dog of medium station. The head should indicate a high degree of intelligence and should be in proportion to the dog’s size; the body rather short and well knit, the limbs strong and finely turned, no feature being so prominent that the dog appears badly proportioned. The dog conveys an impression of determination, strength and activity, style of a high order and carriage easy and graceful.”
The men composing the Boston Terrier Club, who framed this standard in 1900, were as thoughtful a body as could possibly be gotten together, and they carefully considered and deliberated over every point at issue, and in my estimation this standard is as near perfect as any can be. I was an interested participant in the discussion of the same, having in my mind’s eye as models those two noted dogs owned by that wonderful judge of the breed, Mr. Alex. Goode, Champion Monte, and his illustrious sire, Buster. If one takes the pains to analyze the standard he will be impressed by the perfect co-relation of harmony of all parts of the dog, from the tip of his broad, even muzzle, to the end of his short screw tail. Nothing incongruous in its makeup presents itself, but a graceful, symmetrical style characterizes the dog, and I firmly believe that any change whatever would be a detriment.
Franz J. Heilborn
Heilborn’s Raffles
Edward Burnett
A Prominent Early Breeder
It seems to be hardly necessary at this late date to give a history of the dog, but perhaps for that large number of people who are intensely interested in him but have not had the chance to have been made acquainted with his origin, a brief survey may be of service. Although Boston rightly claims the honor of being the birthplace of the Boston terrier, still I think the original start of the dog was in England, for the first dog that was destined to be the ancestor of the modern Boston terrier was a dog named Judge, a cross between an English bull and bull terrier, imported from the other side and owned by Mr. R. C. Hooper, and known as Hooper’s Judge.
On my last visit to England I found that quite a number of dogs have been bred in this way, viz., a first cross between the bull and terrier, especially in the neighborhood of Birmingham in the middle of England; but these dogs are no more like the Boston terrier than an ass is like a thoroughbred horse. Judge was a dark brindle, with a white stripe in face, nearly even mouthed, weighing about thirty-two pounds, and approximating more to the bull than the terrier side. He was mated to a white, stocky built, three-quarter tail, low stationed bitch, named Gyp (or Kate), owned by Mr. Edward Burnett of Southboro. Like Judge, she possessed a good, short, blocky head. It may not be out of place to state here that some few years ago, on paying a visit to Mr. Burnett at Deerfoot Farm, Southboro, he told me that in the early days he possessed thirteen white Boston terrier dogs that used to accompany him in his walks about the farm, and woe to any kind of vermin or vagrant curs that showed themselves. From Judge and Gyp descended Well’s Eph, a low-stationed, dark brindle dog with even white markings, weighing twenty-eight pounds. Eph was mated to a golden brindle, short-headed, twenty pound bitch, having a three-quarter tail, named Tobin’s Kate. From this union came a red brindle dog with a white blaze on one side of his face, white collar, white chest, and white feet, weighing twenty-two pounds, and possessing the first screw tail, named Barnard’s Tom. I shall never forget the first visit I made to Barnard’s stable to see him. To my mind he possessed a certain type, style and quality such as I had never seen before, but which stamped him as the first real Boston terrier, as the dog is today understood. I was never tired of going to see him and his brother, Atkinson’s Toby. Tom was mated to a dark brindle bitch, evenly marked, weighing twenty pounds. She had a good, short, blocky head, and a three-quarter tail, and known as Kelley’s Nell. The result of this mating was a dog destined to make Boston terrier history, and to my mind the most famous Boston terrier born, judged by results. He was known as “Mike,” commonly called “Barnard’s Mike.” He was a rather light brindle and white, even mouthed, short tailed dog, weighing about twenty-five pounds, very typical, but what impressed me was his large, full eye, the first I had ever seen, and which we see so often occurring in his descendants. I owned a grandson of his named “Gus,” 48136, who was almost a reproduction of him, with eyes fully as large. Unfortunately he jumped out of a third-story window in my kennels and permanently ended his usefulness. Chief among the direct descendants from Hooper’s Judge were the noted stud dogs, Ben Butler, Hall’s Max, O’Brien’s Ross, Hook’s Punch, Trimount King, McMullen’s Boxer, and Ben, Goode’s Ned, and Bixby’s Tony Boy. The two dogs that impressed me the most in that group were Max, a fairly good sized, beautiful dispositioned dog that could almost talk, belonging to Dr. Hall, then a house doctor at the Eye and Ear Infirmary, Charles street. He was used, I am told, a great deal in the stud, and sired a great many more puppies than the doctor ever knew of. Bixby’s Tony Boy was the other. I had a very handsome bitch by him out of a Torrey’s Ned bitch, and liked her so much that I offered Mr. Bixby, I believe, $700 for Tony, only to be told that a colored gentleman (who evidently knew a good thing when he saw it) had offered him $200 more.
Of the line of early bitches of the same breeding may briefly be mentioned Reynold’s Famous, dam of Gilbert’s Fun; Kelley’s Nell, dam of Ross and Trimount King; Saunder’s Kate, dam of Ben Butler; Nolan’s Mollie, dam of Doctor, Evadne and Nancy.
Quite a number of other small dogs were subsequently introduced into the breed, which had now been somewhat inbred. These were largely imported from the other side, and were similar in type to Hooper’s Judge. One of the most noted was the Jack Reede dog. He was an evenly marked, reddish brindle and white, rather rough in coat, three-quarter tail, weighing fourteen pounds. Another very small dog was the Perry dog, imported from Scotland, bluish and white in color, with a three-quarter straight tail, and weighing but six pounds. I have always felt very sorry not to have seen him, as he must have been a curiosity. Still another outside dog, also imported, and very quarrelsome, white in color, weighing eighteen pounds, with a good, large skull, and an eye as full as Barnard’s Mike, but straight tail, was Kelley’s Brick. Another outside dog (I do not know where he came from), was O’Brien’s Ben. He was a short, cobby, white and tan brindle color, three-quarter tail, with a short head and even mouth. It will be observed that practically all these outside dogs were small sized, and were selected largely on that account. By the continued inbreeding of the most typical of the sons and daughters of Tom, the present type of the dog was made permanent.
Barnard’s Tom
Hall’s Max
Champion Halloo Prince
Bixby’s Tony Boy
Perhaps this somewhat restricted review of the breed, going back over thirty-six or seven years and showing the somewhat mixed ancestry of our present blue-blooded Boston terrier of today, may afford some explanation of the diversity of type frequently presented in one litter. I have seen numbers of litters where the utmost attention has been paid to every detail with the expectancy of getting crackerjacks, to find that one will have to wait for the “next time,” as the litter in question showed the bull type, and the terrier also, and very little Boston; but fortunately, with the mating intelligently attended to, and the putting aside of all dogs that do not comport to the standard as non-breeders, a type of a dog will be bred true to our highest ideals. My advice to all breeders is, do not get discouraged, try, yes, try again, and Boston terriers, that gladden the eye and fill the pocketbook, will be yours.
CHAPTER II.
THE BOSTON TERRIER CLUB.
ITS HISTORY, THE ORDER OF ITS BUSINESS, CONSTITUTION, BY-LAWS, AND OFFICIAL STANDARD.
In 1890 a club was formed in Boston by a comparatively small body of men who were very much interested in the dog then known as the Round-Headed Bull and Terrier dog. These men were breeders and lovers of the dog, and their main object in coming together was not to have a social good time (although, happily, this generally took place), but to further the interests of the dog in every legitimate way. The dog had been shown at the New England Kennel Club show, held in Boston in April, 1888, being judged by Mr. J. P. Barnard, Jr., ofttimes styled “the father of the breed,” practically two years before the formation of the Club. The year following the Club applied for admission in the American Kennel Club, and recognition for their dogs in the Stud Book. The A. K. C. stated that while perfectly willing to take the Club into its fold, they could not place the dog in the Stud Book, as he was not an established breed, and suggesting, that as the dog was not a bull terrier, and as he was then bred exclusively in Boston, the name of the “Boston Terrier Club.” The year following the A. K. C., after a great deal of persuasion by the loyal and devoted members of the Club, became convinced of the merits of the breed, and formally acknowledged the same by admitting the Club to membership, and giving their dog a place in the official Stud Book.
The Boston Terrier Club is duly incorporated under the laws of Massachusetts, has a present membership of from seventy-five to a hundred, men and women who are devoted to the dog, and willing to do everything for its advancement. The annual meeting is held on the second Wednesday in December, at which a number of judges are elected, whose names are forwarded to the bench show committees of the principal shows, requesting that one of the number be elected to officiate as judge of the Boston terriers. Monthly meetings are held which are always exceedingly interesting and instructive.
The officers are elected by printed ballots sent to all members of the Club, who mark and return them. They consist of the president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer. The executive committee consists of the officers (ex officio) and three others.
The Club gives a specialty show yearly in Boston and is the largest and greatest of one breed fixtures; the dog being, in fact, one of the largest supporters of the dog shows in the country. Cups and medals are offered at most of the bench shows for competition among the members, and at the Ladies’ Kennel Association shows a cup and medal were offered, open to all exhibitors of Boston terriers.
The Boston Terrier Club is duly incorporated under the laws of Massachusetts, has a present membership of from seventy-five to a hundred, men and women who are devoted to the dog, and willing to do everything for its advancement. The annual meeting is held on the second Wednesday in December, at which a number of judges are elected, whose names are forwarded to the bench show committees of the principal shows, requesting that one of the number be elected to officiate as judge of the Boston terriers. Monthly meetings are held which are always exceedingly interesting and instructive.
The officers are elected by printed ballots sent to all members of the Club, who mark and return them. They consist of the president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer. The executive committee consists of the officers (ex officio) and three others.
The Club gives a specialty show yearly in Boston and is the largest and greatest of one breed fixtures; the dog being, in fact, one of the largest supporters of the dog shows in the country. Cups and medals are offered at most of the bench shows for competition among the members, and at the Ladies’ Kennel Association shows a cup and medal were offered, open to all exhibitors of Boston terriers.
In view of the fact that so many Boston Terrier Clubs are starting up all over the country, and even beyond, the following Order of Business, Constitution, By-Laws, and Official Standard, can safely be taken as models:
It goes without saying that any place is not good enough for a dog, although when one considers the way some dogs are housed in small, dark outbuildings, or damp, ill-lighted and poorly ventilated cellars, or even perhaps worse, in old barrels or discarded drygoods boxes in some out-of-the-way corner, it is not surprising the quality of the puppies raised in them.
A great many people who only keep one or two dogs keep them in the kitchen or living room, and here, of course, conditions are all right, but the fancier who keeps any considerable number will find that it pays to house his dogs in a comfortable, roomy, dry building, free from draughts, on high lands (with a gravel foundation, if possible), that can be flooded with sunshine and fresh air. Such a kennel can be simple or elaborate in construction, severely plain or ornamental in its architecture, but it must possess the above characteristics in order to have its occupants kept in the pink of condition. Where half a dozen dogs are kept, I think a kennel about 20 feet long, nine feet wide, with a pitched roof, nine feet high in the front, and at the back seven feet, with a southern exposure, with good windows that open top and bottom, and a good tight board floor will do admirably. This can, of course, be partitioned off in pens to suit, with convenient runs outside wired at the top to prevent dogs jumping over. The building should, of course, be well constructed, covered with good sheathing paper, and either clapboarded or shingled. Such a building should be cool in summer and warm in winter, and thoroughly weather proof. If provided with a good “Eureka ventilator” and well painted, the dogs and their owner will be satisfied. Where a much larger number of dogs are kept, then a corresponding amount of floor space is a necessity. I rather like the style of a kennel, say from fifty to a hundred feet long, twelve to fifteen feet wide, with an open compartment or shed, about twelve feet long (in which the dogs can take a sun bath or get the air if the weather is not favorable to go outside. This also makes an ideal feeding pen), in the middle of the house, without outside runs to each pen, and each run opening into a large exercising yard, so that all the dogs may have a good frolic together, of course, under the watchful eye of the kennel man.
The large breeders will also require a separate building at some distance from the main kennels for use as a hospital, a small kennel for his bitches in season, and some small, portable kennels which can be placed under adequate shade trees for his litters of puppies during the hot weather. It would be an excellent plan if good shade trees could be planted to cover all the runs, but if this is not possible, then it is advisable to have at the rear of the kennels a clear space covered over with a roof, say ten or twelve feet wide, for the dogs to have free access to during the heat of the day.
Perhaps a description of our own kennels, entirely different in construction from these, and costing more to build, may be of interest here. We have two buildings, seventy-five feet apart, built exactly like a house, with two stories and a high basement or cellar, twenty-five feet wide and thirty feet long. One of these houses is lined with matched paneling and divided off on each floor into separate compartments; the other is only boarded, one thickness of good paper and clapboarded and, of course, not nearly as warm. This second building has no pens in it. The basement has a stone wall at the back, but on the east, south and west sides is boarded to the ground, and has a dry gravel floor. These buildings are well supplied with windows (the same as a house), and get the sun all day. In these buildings we have no artificial heat whatever, and all stock, except small puppies, are kept there. Our pups in the winter have warm quarters until they are four months old, when they are placed in the south side of the warmer kennels. All puppies are kept in the cool basement in the hot weather, and during the summer our bitches in whelp are kept there also. We have not any separate runs attached to these buildings, which entails a much closer watch on the dogs, of course, but each building opens into a very large enclosure with abundant shade trees, and the dogs can, if let out, have the run of several acres.
In the fall of the year we have several tons of rowen (second crop hay with a good deal of clover in it) put in the upper story of the open kennel, and a smaller amount in the first story, and during the winter a certain number of young dogs that will not quarrel amongst themselves are given the run of the building where they burrow into the soft hay and are as comfortable as can be. Particular care has to be taken that they do not get any bones or any food to quarrel over, or trouble would ensue right away. Allow me to say that only dogs brought up together with perfect dispositions can be allowed to run together. A strange dog must never be placed with them or his days will be numbered. In the summer, of course, no dogs are kept in the upper story, as they would suffer from the heat. Also no bitches in whelp are ever allowed to run together.
In the other kennel in each pen during the cold weather is a large, tight box, with hole in side, filled with this soft hay, renewed when necessary, in which two dogs sleep very comfortably. The windows in each kennel, as soon as the weather permits, are kept open at the top night and day, and top and bottom while the dogs are out doors in the daytime, and in this way the kennels can be kept perfectly sweet and sanitary. Three times during the year, in spring, midsummer and fall, the kennels are treated with a thorough fumigation of sulphur. We buy bar sulphur by the barrel of a wholesale druggist or importer, and use a good quantity (a small dose does not do much good), keeping the kennel windows and doors tightly closed for twelve hours, after which the building is thoroughly aired before the dogs are returned. Of course, this would not be practical during the winter, nor is it at all necessary. We find that once a week (except of course, during the cold weather), it is a good plan to give the woodwork that the dog comes in contact with a good sprinkling with a watering pot with a solution of permanganate of potassium, using a tablespoonful of the crystals dissolved in a quart of hot water. It costs at wholesale fifty cents per pound, and is the best disinfectant I have ever used. Unless the kennels are kept scrupulously clean the dogs’ eyes, especially the puppies, are liable to become seriously inflamed. The gravel in the basement we remove to a depth of eight inches twice a year, putting fresh in its place. Where a large number of dogs are kept it will be found very convenient to have a cook house, wash room and a small closet for kennel utensils in close proximity to the kennels.
By attending to these important essentials, viz., an abundance of pure air and sunshine, protection from dampness, draughts, and cold, proper disinfecting, and sufficient protection from the intense heat of summer, good health, and a reasonable amount of success can be confidently expected, but disease will surely find an entrance where these requirements are not met.
I would like to add that kennels only large enough for white mice, or perchance piebald rats, can never be successfully used to raise Boston terriers in.
CHAPTER IV.
GENERAL HINTS ON BREEDING.
Having become possessed of suitable kennels to house his stock, the breeder is confronted with the great question: How and where shall I obtain my breeding stock? Much depends on a right start and the getting of the proper kind of dogs for the foundation. Our celebrated Boston poet, Oliver Wendell Holmes, when asked when a child’s education should begin, promptly replied, “A hundred years before it was born.” This contains an inherent truth that all breeders of choice stock of whatever description it may be, recognize. To be well born is half the battle, and I think this applies with particular force to the Boston terrier, for without a good ancestry of well bred dogs, possessing the best of dispositions, constitutions and conformity to the standard, he is worse than useless.
Whether the start is made with one bitch or a dozen, I believe the best plan to follow is to obtain of a reliable breeder, noted for the general excellence of his dogs in all desirable characteristics, what he considers the best stock obtainable for breeding purposes. This does not imply, of course, that these bitches will be candidates for bench honors, but it does mean that if mated with suitable sires the production of good, all-round puppies with a reasonable amount of luck will be the result. It would be useless to attempt to deal with the subject of breeding in more than a few of its aspects, for after a period of twenty-five years of expended and scientific experiments in the breeding exclusively of Bostons, I shall have to confess that there are many problems still unsolved. The rules and regulations that govern the production of many other breeds of dogs seem impotent here, the assumption that “like produces like” does not seem to hold good frequently in this breed, but perhaps the elements of uncertainty give an unspeakable charm to the efforts put forth for the production of the dogs which will be a credit to the owner’s kennel. The old adage that “there is nothing duller than a puzzle of which the answer is known,” can readily be applied here. I shall endeavor to confine my remarks to the laws observed and the lines followed for the production of dogs in our kennels, especially in the attainment of correct color and markings, vigorous constitutions and desirable dispositions.
In speaking of the breeding stock I am aware that I am going contrary to the opinion of many breeders when I state that I believe that the dam should possess equal or more quality than the sire, that her influence and characteristics are perpetuated in her posterity to a greater degree than are those of the sire’s, especially that feature of paramount importance, a beautiful disposition, hence I speak of the maternal side of the house first. There are two inexorable laws that confront the breeder at the onset, more rigid than were those of the Medes and Persians, the non-observance of which will inevitably lead to shipwreck. Better by far turn one’s energies in attempting to square the circle, or produce a strain of frogs covered with feathers, than attempt to raise Boston terriers without due attention being given to those physiological laws which experience has proven correct. The first law is that “Like produces like,” although, as previously stated in the case of this breed, more than in any other known to the writer, many exceptions present themselves, even when the utmost care has been exercised, still the maxim holds good in the main. The second law is that of Heredity, too often paid inadequate attention to, but which demands constant and unremitting apprehension, as it modifies the first law in many ways. It may be briefly described as the biological law by which the general characteristics of living creatures are repeated in their descendants. Practically every one has noticed its workings in the human family, how many children bear a stronger resemblance to their grandparents, uncles, cousins, etc., than to their parents, and in the lower order of animals, and it seems to me in the Bostons especially, this tendency to atavism, or throwing back to some ancestor, in many cases quite remote, is very pronounced, hence the necessity of a good general knowledge of the pedigree and family history of the dogs the breeder selects for his foundation stock. A kennel cannot be built in a day; it takes time, money, perseverance, and a strict attention to detail to insure success.
“Breed to the best,” is a golden rule, but this applies not only to the animals themselves, but also in a far greater measure to the good general qualities possessed by their ancestry. Far more pregnant with good results would be the mating of two good all-round specimens, lacking to a considerable extent show points, but the products of two families known for their general excellence for several generations, than the offspring would be of two noted prize winners of uncertain ancestry, neither of which possessed the inherent quality of being able to reproduce themselves. It will be noted that very few first prize winners had prize winning sires and dams. The noted stud dogs of the past, “Buster,” “Sullivan’s Punch,” “Cracksman,” “Hickey’s Teddy IV.” and many others were not in themselves noted winners, and the same statement may be made of the dams of many of the prize winning dogs, but they possessed in themselves and their ancestry that “hall mark” of quality which appeared in a pronounced form in their offspring. Experience has shown that first class qualities must exist for several generations in order to render their perpetuation highly probable. The converse of this is equally true, that any bad qualities bred for the same length of time are quite as hard to eliminate. If the dog or bitch possesses weak points, be sure to breed to dogs coming from families that are noted for their corresponding strong points. In this case the principle of “give and take” will be adopted. It used to be the ambition of every breeder (or, at least, most of them), to produce a winner, rather than the production of a line of dogs of good uniform type, of good average salable quality, but most have lived long enough to see that this has not paid as well in money or expected results as where similar endeavors have been directed towards the production of good all-round dogs, always striving to advance their dogs to a higher grade of excellence. In this way in nearly every instance prize winning dogs have been produced, and there is this peculiarity noticeable in this breed, that any one, whether he be a breeder of the greatest number, or a very poor man owning only one or two in his kitchen kennel, possesses an equal chance of producing the winner of the blue. The breeder of today has a far easier time than in the early days of the dog when type was not as pronounced or fixed, and when considerable inbreeding of necessity had to be resorted to. In almost all parts of the country stud dogs of first class lineage are obtainable and the general public are educated sufficiently to understand the good points of the dog. I think the breeding of this dog appeals to a wider class of people than any other breed, from the man of wealth who produces the puppies to be given away as wedding presents or Christmas gifts, down to the lone widow, or the man incapacitated for hard work, who must do something to keep the wolf from the door, and who finds in the raising of these charming little pets a certain source of income and a delightful occupation combined. I do not think that any one may apprehend that the market will ever be overstocked, for as the dog becomes known, the desire for possession among all classes will be correspondingly increased, and as he is strictly an American product, no importation from Europe can possibly supply winners, or specially good dogs, as is the case with almost all other breeds. And the fact is demonstrated that dogs of A 1 quality can be produced on American soil.
There are two or three subjects that demand the most careful consideration at the hands of the breeder, and to which I am afraid in many cases not particular enough attention is given. I refer in the first place to the question of inbreeding, an admitted necessity in the early history of the dog, but in the writer’s estimation very harmful and much to be discouraged at the present time. I will yield to no man in the belief that the fact is absolutely and scientifically true that close consanguineous breeding is the most powerful means of determining character and establishing type, in many instances justifiable as the only correct way to fix desirable qualities, both physical and mental, but extreme care must be exercised that both parties to the union must be of good quality and not share the same defects, and where it is evident that the extra good qualities on the one side more than outbalance the defects of the other, and extreme precaution must always be paid to avoid carrying this system too far.
In regard to intense inbreeding, as in the case of mating dogs from the same sire and dam, or the bitch to her sire, or dam to son, I thing it is highly objectionable and should never under any circumstances be resorted to; failure will ensue. Far better to let the bitch go by unmated and lose six months than mate her in this way because a suitable stud dog was not at the time available. I believe that this inbreeding is productive of excessive nervousness, weakness in physical form, the impairment of breeding functions, and the predisposition to disease in its multiform manifestations.
Edward Axtell, Jr.,
and One of His Boston Terriers
E. S. Pollard,
A Large and Successful Breeder
St. Botolph’s Mistress King
That eminent authority, Sir John Seabright, the originator of the early race of bantams, known as the silver and gold spangled Seabrights, also conducted an exhaustive series of experiments on the inbreeding of dogs and demonstrated to an absolute certainty that the system was productive of weakness, diminished growth, and general weediness. His experiments had a world-wide reputation and the writer, when he first visited his large estates near London, little dreamed that in after years he would personally benefit by Sir John’s work. I believe the prevailing ideas in many quarters a number of years ago, as to the general stupidity of the Boston terrier (and in some isolated cases I believed well founded), arose from the fact that it was popularly believed he was too much inbred. I will give just one case of inbreeding in our kennels, tried for experiment’s sake, as a warning. I took the most rugged bitch I possessed and mated her to her sire, a dog of equal vigor. The result was six puppies, strong, and as handsome as a picture. When two months old they were sold to different parties on the Eastern seaboard, from Philadelphia up to the Canadian line. This was before the West had “caught on” to the breed. About two months later I had a letter from New York stating that the pup was growing finely, but that he seemed to be hard of hearing. A few days after this I received another epistle from Salem that the puppy I had sent on was believed to be stone deaf. It would be superfluous to add that the purchase money was returned, and the other four customers were notified of the condition of the others. It may seem somewhat incredible, but two out of the four stated that they believed the pups had defective hearing, and declined to receive their money back, and the other two stated that before my notification they had never observed that their dogs were deaf. Here was a case of the entire litter being perfect practically in every other respect, and yet every one stone deaf, and in my estimation not worth a sou. As we have never had a case of deafness in our kennels before or since, we attribute this solely to inbreeding.
Another important feature, little understood, and frequently much dreaded, is that of Antecedent Impressions. When a bitch has been served by a dog not of her own breed it has been proven in extremely rare cases that the subsequent litters by dogs of her own kind, showed traces (or, at least, one or more of the litter did) of the dog she was first lined by. The theory by physiologists is that the life-giving germ, implanted by the first dog, penetrates the serous coat of the ovary, burrows into its parenchyma, and seeks out immature ova, not to be ripened and discharged perhaps for years, and to produce the modifying influence described. Many breeders are unwise enough to believe that a bitch the victim of misalliance is practically ruined for breeding purposes and discard her. While, of course, we believe in the fact of Antecedent Impressions, we think they are as rare as the proverbial visit of angels. We have given this subject serious attention and have tried numerous experiments, using various dogs to ward our bitches, including a pug, spaniel, wire-haired fox terrier, pointer, and perhaps one other, and we have never seen a trace of these matings in subsequent litters. One case, for example: In another part of this book we allude to a dog spoken of by Dr. Mott, in his “Treatise of the Boston Terrier,” named “Muggy Dee.” The grandmother of this charming little dog was bred in our kennels, by name, “St. Botolph’s Bessie.” We sold her to a Boston banker, and she matured into a beautiful dog. Upon coming in season she was unfortunately warded by a spaniel on the estate, which so disgusted her owner that he gave her to the coachman. She proved a perfect gold mine to him, as she raised two litters of elegant ideal Bostons every twelve months for a great number of years, and never at any time showed any result of the misalliance.
On the subject of Mental Impressions we need say but little, as the chances of it ever taking place are so small that we merely give it a passing notice and say that in all our experience we have never been troubled with a case. For the benefit of the uninitiated will briefly state that this consists of the mental impression made on the mind of a bitch by a dog with whom she has been denied sexual intercourse, affecting the progeny resulting from the union of another dog with the bitch, generally in regard to the color, and this strange phenomena, when it does occur, is apt to mark usually one puppy of each litter.
A fact not generally known by breeders is that if a bitch is lined by a second dog at any time during heat, the chances are that a second conception may take place, resulting in two distinct sets of pups, half-sister or brother to each other. This fact we have proven.
There is one other important feature which must be noticed before this chapter is closed, and that is Predetermining the Sex. Most breeders, of course, are anxious to have male pups predominate in a litter, and it is a demonstrated fact that ordinary mating produces from four to ten per cent more males than females. For a number of years I had always believed it was impossible to breed so as to attain more than the excess of males above noted, but several years ago I accepted an invitation from Mr. Burnett, of Deerfoot Farm, of Southboro (the owner of Kate or Gyp, the mother of the breed), to spend the day. He was, as will be recalled, one of the earliest and most enthusiastic breeders of the Boston, and is now a scientific breeder of choice dairy stock. We had been discussing a number of problems in regard to raising stock, when he exclaimed: “Mr. Axtell, I believe I have discovered the problem of sex breeding. If I want heifer calves, I breed the cow as soon as she comes in season. If a bull calf is wanted, the cow is served just before going out of season.” And said he, “In nineteen experiments I have only been unsuccessful once, and I think you might try the same plan with your Bostons.” I have since done so, and although not nearly the same measure of success has attended my experiments as his, yet by breeding bitches at the close of the heat rather than at its commencement, the number of males in a litter has materially increased. Again, I find if a young, vigorous dog is bred to a similar bitch, females will predominate in the offspring, whereas, if the same bitch is bred to a much older dog, an excess of males will generally occur. Occasionally some dogs will be met with that no matter what mated with, will produce largely males, and some the opposite of this will nearly always produce females, and some bitches, no matter how bred, do likewise, but these are exceptions, and not the rule. A kennel man need never worry about sex, inasmuch as good dogs of either gender will always be in demand.
The law of Selection must be carefully attended to to insure the best results. Choose your best and most typical bitches for breeding, especially those that approximate rather to the bull type and are rather long in body and not too narrow in their hind quarters. I do not care if the dam has a somewhat longer tail than the dog, my experience has been that a bitch possessing a tight screw tail did not do quite as well in whelping as one having one a little longer. Do not consider this as suggesting that the tail is a matter of secondary importance, by no means, it is of primal import, and too much attention can never be given to the production of this distinguishing mark of the dog. A Boston without a good tail is almost as worthless as a check without a signature.
Be sure at the time of breeding the bitch is free from worms. A great many are troubled whose owners are totally ignorant of the fact, and this frequently accounts for non-success. Always remember that worms thrive the most when the alimentary canal is kept loaded with indigestible or half-digested food, and that liquid foods are favorable to these pests, while solids tend to expel them. Freshly powdered areca nut, in teaspoonful doses, and the same quantity of a mixture of oil of male fern and olive oil, three parts oil and one part male fern oil, I find are both excellent vermifuges to give to matured dogs. Give a dose and two days after repeat, and this, I think, will be found generally effectual.
Do not, on any account, allow the breeding stock to become too fat. Proper feeding and exercise, of course, will prevent this. It will be found if this is not attended to that the organs of generation have lost their functional activity, and if pups are produced, are, as a rule, small and lack vigor. My experience with Bostons is that it is very desirable to breed them as often as they come in season; if allowed to go by it will be found increasingly harder to get them in whelp. I think a stud dog, to last for a reasonable number of years, should not be used more frequently than once a week. I have found it pays best to give the bitch in whelp a generous feed of raw meat daily. It often effectually prevents the puppy-eating habit.
In closing these general hints on breeding, allow me to say there is no reason whatever, if one has a genuine love for the dog and is thoroughly in earnest in his attentions to it, why the breeding problem should possess any great terrors for him. Perhaps, before closing this chapter, it might be well to write on one or two matters, practically of no special import, but which may at times be instructive and illuminate some few incidents that may puzzle the beginner.
I allude first to that strange phenomena known as “false heat,” to which Bostons, more than any other breed with which the writer is familiar, are liable, and which consists of the bitch coming “in season” between the two periods in the year when she legitimately should do so, and after being warded by the dog, is, of course, not in whelp. The next is somewhat akin to this, and consists of the fact that the bitch, after being properly warded by a dog, notwithstanding all the external evidences of being in whelp, even to the possession of milk in her breasts at the expiration of the ninth week, is not so, neither has she been. If, in addition to the above symptoms, and there has been unusual abdominal, uterine, and breast enlargement, with a discharge of blood for several days and no pups are in evidence, then in this case it may safely be concluded that the offspring fell victims to the puppy-eating habit, in which case a close watch must be kept on the bitch at the next time of whelping, as this is a curable habit generally. I have had two cases to my knowledge, both of which were cured I think, largely by giving these two bitches all the raw meat they could possibly eat while in whelp. One other fact, related somewhat to the last two, and one that the inexperienced breeder must give intelligent heed to, is that some bitches go through the entire period of gestation without presenting a single sign of pregnancy appreciable to the ordinary observer. Of course, to a dog man the facts of the case would in all probability be known, but I shall have to confess, after years of extended experience I myself have been deceived two or three times. Never give up hope until the last gun is fired.
I think it will generally be considered a good plan, if the bitch is expected to whelp in the kennel she has been in the habit of occupying, to thoroughly clean out and wash with boiling water the box or corner she will use, to destroy all eggs and worms that may chance to be there. I also deem it a good plan to rub gently into her coat and over her breasts precipitated sulphur two or three days before the expected arrival. If the bitch is suffering from a severe case of constipation at this time, a dose of castor oil will be of service, otherwise, let her severely alone. A bitch that is in good health, properly fed, that has free access to good wholesome drinking water, can safely be left without a cathartic. Another important fact to be observed in breeding Bostons, is the suitability of certain stud dogs for particular bitches. It used to be my belief for a number of years, and I suppose many dog men today entertain the same idea, that a first class dog in every respect mated with a number of equally well bred typical bitches would produce on an average a comparatively uniform type of pups. Nothing could be further from actual results. The same dog bred, say to four females practically alike in style, size, conformation, color and markings, and from common ancestry, will give perchance in one litter two or three crackerjacks, and the other three will contain only medium pups. This same thing will occur every time the dogs are bred. This is because the bitch with the choice pups and the dog “nick,” a phrase signifying that some psychological union has taken place, not understood by man, in which the best points of both dogs are reproduced in their offspring. Whenever one finds a dog eminently suited to his bitch, do not make a change, always breed to the same dog. I am perfectly cognizant of the fact that a great temptation presents itself to want to breed to a better dog, a noted prize winner probably, expecting, of course, that inasmuch as the dam did so well with a somewhat inferior dog, she must of necessity do correspondingly better with an A 1 dog. The reasoning is perfectly correct, but the result does not correspond. Very inferior pups to her previous litter by the inferior dog surprise and disgust the owner. In our kennels we have had numerous examples of this. One bitch especially, years ago, when bred to “Buster,” always gave first class puppies of uniform type each litter, but the same bitch bred to some noted prize winner always gave ordinary pups. Another bitch that at the present time is practically retiring from the puppy raising business from age, when bred to Hickey’s Teddy IV., always had in her litter four crackerjacks out of the seven or eight she always presented us with; when bred to any other dog (and we have tried her with several), no matter how good, never had a first class pup in the litter. Hence I repeat, if a dog “nicks” with your bitch, resulting in good pups, do not on any account ever change. Let the marriage last for life. Somewhat closely connected with this last fact is another equally important, the fact of prepotency in a stud dog, consisting of the capacity on the part of the dog to transmit his share of characteristics to his offspring in a far larger degree than is imparted by the average dog. Those who closely follow the breed will discover how certain dogs do, and have done in the past, from “Barnard’s Mike” down to certain dogs of the present time, stamp the hall-mark of excellence on all the pups they sire, in a greater or less degree. Happy are those owners of dams who are aware of this important fact and take pains to use in the stud dogs of this character. I have sometimes wondered how much Barnard’s Mike was worth to the breed. It will be doubtless remembered by horsemen that the great trainer, Hiram Woodruff, speaking of the importation of the thoroughbred, “Messenger,” one of the founders of the American trotter, in 1788, said that “when Messenger charged down the gang-plank, in landing from the ship, the value of not less than one hundred million dollars struck our soil.” He would be a very courageous man who would dare compute the worth of “Mike” or “Buster” or “Sullivan’s Punch,” when viewed from the same standpoint.
Mr & Mrs White
Office: (810) 887-0117
E-mail:
Blue.Water_Boston.Terrier@live.com
