Did Bostons Used To Be Big?
Let's look at the facts
Though the stud books can be an excellent source for the most accurate information for many of the early dogs, they do not contain sizes of those registered. However, thanks to the authors who were there during the conception of the breed, we have descriptions of the earliest and most notable contributors to the Boston Terrier gene pool.
According to J.V. Mott, who was present during much of the early history, and Mr. Dwight Baldwin, whose accounting of the early years is relayed in Mott’s book, “The Boston Terrier”, Hooper’s Judge was approximately 32 pounds. Judge was bred to Burnett’s Gyp, who was said to be about 20 pounds. Their offspring, Well’s Eph, was approximately 28 pounds. Well’s Eph was bred to Tobin’s Kate, who was only 20 pounds. From that breeding were two notable males, Barnard’s Tom and Atkinson’s Toby, with Tom being 22 pounds and the more successful sire. Barnard’s Tom was bred to Kelly’s Nell who was 20 pounds. They produced Barnard’s Mike who was 25 pounds. These dogs were described to have “comprised the main line, and to them is the most credit due”, all at an average of just 24 pounds.
Other notable imports included:
The Jack Reed Dog - 14 poundsThe Perry Dog - 6 poundsKelly’s Brick - 18 poundsO’Brien’s Ben - 20 pounds
None of these dogs would have increased the size of the Boston Terrier. They were brought in to DECREASE the size of the Boston Terrier quite early on, at a time when it would appear that the typical Boston Terrier was under 30 pounds.
According to J.V. Mott, who was present during much of the early history, and Mr. Dwight Baldwin, whose accounting of the early years is relayed in Mott’s book, “The Boston Terrier”, Hooper’s Judge was approximately 32 pounds. Judge was bred to Burnett’s Gyp, who was said to be about 20 pounds. Their offspring, Well’s Eph, was approximately 28 pounds. Well’s Eph was bred to Tobin’s Kate, who was only 20 pounds. From that breeding were two notable males, Barnard’s Tom and Atkinson’s Toby, with Tom being 22 pounds and the more successful sire. Barnard’s Tom was bred to Kelly’s Nell who was 20 pounds. They produced Barnard’s Mike who was 25 pounds. These dogs were described to have “comprised the main line, and to them is the most credit due”, all at an average of just 24 pounds.
Other notable imports included:
The Jack Reed Dog - 14 poundsThe Perry Dog - 6 poundsKelly’s Brick - 18 poundsO’Brien’s Ben - 20 pounds
None of these dogs would have increased the size of the Boston Terrier. They were brought in to DECREASE the size of the Boston Terrier quite early on, at a time when it would appear that the typical Boston Terrier was under 30 pounds.
From the Boston Terrier History Museum.
Note the sizes mentioned in the description.
VISUAL PROOF
An excellent source of information are the "stud cards" that were a big part of promoting available stud services in the early years. The usually listed the weight of the dog, along with pertinent wins, location and stud fee. This gallery is an example of a random sampling of stud cards photographed at the Boston Terrier Museum in Floydada, Texas.
FOR THE FULL E-BOSTON TERRIER ARTICLE, CLICK BELOW
TOO SMALL?
IN THE EARLY YEARS, THERE WAS ACTUALLY A CONCERN THAT THE BOSTON WOULD BE "TOO SMALL", WHICH RUNS CONTRARY TO COMMON BELIEF
In “The Dog Book” by James Watson, the reduction of size from the founding sire, Hooper’s Judge, is documented as well. It states, “These later importations were smaller than the Hooper’s Judge style of dog and tended to lower the size, so that in the 1890 Boston classification there was a division by weight of under and over 20 pounds for dogs and 18 pounds for bitches”. James Watson goes on to say regarding size, “On the subject of size the tendency of late has been to decrease until we have got too far close to the regulation toy size of other terriers.” He describes the marketability of the smaller sized Bostons, even suggesting that there might be enough smaller Bostons to create demand for classes for dogs as low as 10 pounds.
This reduction in size became such a concern a letter was written by a respected member of the Boston Terrier Club, stating “More and more clearly we are beginning to feel the pressure of the popular demand for a smaller Boston Terrier.” The letter goes on to say, “Surely we ought to keep the division wide enough between the dog as we have known him for ten years or more, and the tiny, shivering, bloodless creatures we occasionally come across in other toys. Great reduction in size means injudicious inbreeding, with the loss of intelligence, loss of stamina, loss of reproductive powers which follow that course; in fine, the loss of all that we most value in the breed.”
The Boston Terrier at one point was in danger of becoming too small, not too large.
This reduction in size became such a concern a letter was written by a respected member of the Boston Terrier Club, stating “More and more clearly we are beginning to feel the pressure of the popular demand for a smaller Boston Terrier.” The letter goes on to say, “Surely we ought to keep the division wide enough between the dog as we have known him for ten years or more, and the tiny, shivering, bloodless creatures we occasionally come across in other toys. Great reduction in size means injudicious inbreeding, with the loss of intelligence, loss of stamina, loss of reproductive powers which follow that course; in fine, the loss of all that we most value in the breed.”
The Boston Terrier at one point was in danger of becoming too small, not too large.
Additional Facts About The Boston Terrier and Its History
Can Boston Terriers Have Long Hair?
Are Merle Bostons Purebred?
Can Boston Terriers Have Long Tails?
Are Boston Terriers With Longer Noses Healthier?
Did Bostons Used To Be 40-50 Pounds?
Is There Anything Wrong With White Headed Bostons?
Are Boston Terriers With Blue Eyes Okay?
Were Boston Terriers Fighting dogs?