TQ2 THE NOTED BREEDERS MR. THOMPSON' AND MR. LUKKY. 



" argument with a friend, although perhaps it is right to 

 " express respectfully one's own opinion. I write you both 

 " from experience and earnest conviction, I never bred a 

 "mastiff with dewclaws, nor would I keep one if I knew it. 

 ' l The addition is a blot on the purity of this grand old breed, 

 " indeed the very sight of them gives me the shivers. My 

 '* grandfather, father, and brother, who have kept individually 

 " packs of harriers, large studs of greyhounds and mastiffs, 

 " ever held these unnecessary appendages in abhorence. I 

 "have known otterhounds, rough terriers, and other long 

 " haired mongrels subject to this pest, but a pure greyhound, 

 "pointer, and the grand old smooth coated mastiff never. If 

 * you think any mention of dewclaws in my pamphlet would 

 tk be objectionable, I will gladly erase it. 1 will read over 

 " your remarks in favour of admitting dewclaws, but nothing 

 " can shake my conviction." 



Again, March igth, 1873, " '^ le hitch has also dewclaws, a 

 sure sign of impurity." 



The dewclaw has long been a vexed question, both in the 

 mastiff and St. Bernard, and there is little doubt it is a sure 

 sign of mongrelism, loose breeding, and crossing, and in the 

 mastiff it usually denotes St. Bernard blood, having been 

 introduced originally through the sheep-dog cross in the St. 

 Bernard. With the strong feelings and convictions in the 

 minds of many against dewclaws, it is hardly worth a sane 

 writer's while to try to influence the question one way or the 

 other. It is certain that close breeding without crossing has 

 the tendency to eradicate this useless abnormal redundancy 

 of toes, in the mastiff, St. Bernard, or any other breed. 



