The Tale of a Dog.

To gain an idea of the extent to which usage has changed in three hundred years, it is necessary only to read the following dog story, which was first recorded in 1587, and was reprinted lately by the London Chronicle:

Item—We present yt at the tyme of our sytting ther hath ben complaynt made of another dogg, betwene a masty & a mungerell, of Peter Quoyte's which hath stronng qualyties by himselfe, which goyng lose abrode doth many times offend the neyghbors & wyll fetch owt of ther howses whole peces of meate, as loynes of mutton & veal & such lyke & a pasty of venson or a whole pownde of candells at a tyme, & will not spoyle yt by the way but cary yt whole to his masters howse, which being a profytable dogg for his master, yet because he is offensyffe to many yt is not sufferable, wherfor his master hath forfeyt for every time 3s. 4d. And be yt comaunded to kepe him tyed or to putt him away upon payn to forfeyte for every tyme he shalbe found in the streets 3s. 4d.

This story takes on significance from the comment of the New York Times:

There, now, is a fine specimen of Shakespearian spelling, for it is dated 1587. Even this, of course, is itself the flower of numberless reformations and changes, all in the direction of simplicity and phonetic—or intended to be. It is at least as different from the so-called long-established spelling as is that of the letters contributed to our columns occasionally by correspondents who think they are showing by horrible examples the dreadful orthography to which the Carnegie iconoclasts would reduce us all.

But what a fine dog story it is, and how quaintly phrased! And how magnanimous is the admission that the animal "betwene a masty and a mungerell," though addicted to larceny, "hath stronng qualyties of himselfe"!

The man who made the record was evidently a lover and a judge of dogs, and the implication is that a "mungerell" was then regarded as belonging to a breed of his own as much as did a "masty." This indicates that our use of the word "mongrel" is a misuse, though the accepted etymology supports us.