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