114 The Dog Book 
as pure and as good as the blues. _Pride’s dam was my old blue and white, 
with tan cheeks and eyebrows. Why I reserved Pride was to breed back 
with him and my blues. He is invaluable as by him I can carry on the 
breed.” This was written in May, 1874, two years later than the book 
was published, and of course is a contradiction of the pedigree he gave with 
that dog and every other by Dash II. out of Belle II., and indeed of all his 
pedigrees, for if one goes they all go, so similar are they in the interbreeding 
of the descendants of these two original dogs he started with. So on this 
allegation those opposed to the Laveracks attacked the whole structure, 
root and branch. But what was there in that after all? Did the excel- 
lence of the Laveracks depend upon whether or not all Mr. Laverack’s self- 
acknowledged tests to improve his strain were subsequently, as he said else- 
where, thrown out, or whether some mixture of some excellent blood still 
remained, or did their claims rest upon what they were individually ? Were 
they not the outcome of fifty years of his own breeding with a well-defined 
object in view? These are the points at issue and nothing else, except 
with that class of breeders who select a sire from the stud-book record of 
pedigrees—and never breed anything good for either show or field trials. 
We are far from supporting the published Laverack pedigrees—quite 
the reverse, in fact, for it is simply impossible that that of Countess is correct. 
If that one falls, they all go, at least all with any such cross as Dash II.—or 
Old Blue Dash as he was generally called—or that of Fred I. Usually the 
Laverack pedigrees are attacked upon two grounds, the presumed impossi- 
bility for any strain to have its origin in but one brace of dogs and to inter- 
breed their progeny successfully for fifty years. The other claim is that 
as Mr. Laverack tried some outcrosses and never gave a pedigree with such 
a cross in it, coupled with the statement with regard to the liver colour in 
Pride of the Border, he did not give correct pedigrees. There is no founda- 
tion for the first assumption as it would be quite possible to continue the 
interbreeding of descendants from one brace of dogs, exercising care to 
breed only from the physically sound ones. With regard to the second 
claim we will say, presuming that nothing further can be adduced against 
the given pedigrees, that a person writing an offhand reply to an intimate 
friend would hardly exercise the care nor make the necessary references he 
would if writing out a pedigree for publication. We would not take the 
Rothwell letter as conclusive against the testimony of the pedigree if the 
latter bore investigation, and that leads us to a line of discussion which we 
