Recently there has been a great revival in numbers of the close and
thick coated, featherless dogs called Labrador retrievers. Their
ancestors, or some of them, were, as the name implies, originally
imported from Labrador. They were not Newfoundlands when first brought
over any more than they are now. But it is rather difficult to say which
sportsmen had one sort and which the other when both first began to be
used for sporting purposes, or to be crossed with setters and water
spaniels, to make the ancestors of our present races of retrievers. The
Labrador, as we know him now, probably had no setter or spaniel for
ancestor, and there is every reason to believe that the Lord Malmesbury
of the _Diary_, and later the Duke of Buccleuch and Sir R. Graham’s
family, maintained the breed in its original form. But probably
in-breeding told the usual story: a cross had to be resorted to, because
the dogs were getting soft, and one cross was introduced at Netherby,
and of all strains to select for a cross one would think that chosen the
worst. It was a keeper’s night-dog that was chosen.
It has been said that Mr. Shirley’s original strain and also Zelstone of
Mr. Farquharson’s strain were descended from Labradors. This is probably
not quite correct. Their coats did not indicate this blood, but that of
the Newfoundland.
The latter’s was always a long, loose, wavy coat with more or less
tendency to feather; the Labrador had no more feather than a pointer,
but a thick close coat with little or no wave. There is no doubt the
purest blood has come from the Duke of Buccleuch’s kennel of late years,
but the author would not like to affirm that crossings between that and
the Netherby kennel did not introduce the night-dog cross into the whole
of the race. The short round heads and wide jaw-bones in these dogs seem
to bear physical witness to ancestry competent to take care of itself.
This statement of a fact is not intended to carry a slur with it, for it
may be said that the big shooter and enthusiastic dog man who found out
these particulars, and gave me the modern history of the breed, has
himself used the Labrador recently as a revival to his flat-coated
strain of retrievers.
Judged from the point of view of an admirer of a good flat-coated
retriever, the present race of Labrador dogs appear common. But it would
be altogether wrong to say definitely that they are so. Make and shape
is very much a question of fashion and taste, and when a certain section
of the population can admire the bulldog it is not within the province
of anybody to lay down the law as to what is canine beauty. At any rate,
they have one great point seldom observed in the flat-coated dogs. Their
loins are usually strong enough to enable them to be active. A dog with
a loin too small for his weight may be fast, but he never can be active,
and as one might expect from this formation the Labradors are remarkably
quick in their movements.
Mr. Holland Hibbert has a big kennel of these dogs, and has exhibited
their work at the retriever trials two seasons. His Munden Single was
given first beauty prize at the 1905 trials, and was placed for looks
over the heads of some very good specimens of the flat-coated sort.
Still, it is not supposed that breeders of the flat-coated sort are
likely to try to breed their dogs to the model then set up; and the
author has always regretted the giving of beauty prizes at field trials.
We go to these meetings to learn from Nature what form she chooses shall
embrace and contain her best internal handiwork. Having found that out
with much expenditure of time and trouble, we must needs read Nature a
lecture before we separate, and instruct her what form she _ought to
have chosen_ for her best. We do not hold a mirror, but a model, up to
Nature, and seem surprised she does not adopt the work of our creations
as her best. This is surely all wrong, for it was obviously the
selection of the best workers for hundreds of generations that evolved
the forms that we call setters, pointers, and spaniels, and made them
different from any other dogs, but did _not_ make them like show dogs of
the present time. If the latter had been the most fit form for the work
to be done, it would assuredly have been evolved by the selection of the
best workers.
[Illustration:
THE HON. A. HOLLAND HIBBERT’S LABRADOR MUNDEN SINGLE
]
[Illustration:
THE HON. A. HOLLAND HIBBERT’S MUNDEN SOVEREIGN
]
[Illustration:
COL. C. J. COTES AND PITCHFORD MARSHAL, WITH HIS BREAKER HARRY DOWNES
]
[Illustration:
THE HON. A. HOLLAND HIBBERT AND MUNDEN SINGLE
]
On these grounds, it seems to be unwise to place on a pedestal for
imitation and admiration the Labrador that was beaten.
If Darwinism has a spark of truth in it, selection of the fittest for
the acts of life has evolved every form in the world except just the
trivialities, the abnormalities, and distortions that man has bred as a
fancy, not to improve, but only to alter. Fancy poultry has been one of
the chief fields for fancy operations in breeding, but, amongst all the
new forms and characters produced, there is only one that would survive
a state of nature for a couple of generations. That one is the old
English game fowl, which was evolved, not by fancy selection, but by
fighting—that is, by the most severe and discriminating form of
selection and survival of the fittest.
Just in the same way will the forms of gun-dogs take care of themselves,
provided selection of the fittest for work is severe enough. The pointer
and setter trials have neglected stamina. If they had not done so, our
working setters would have had backs like iron bars, as theirs have in
America, where stamina has been the first consideration at field trials.
When Mr. Holland Hibbert ran Munden Single, the Labrador, in the 1904
retriever trials, there is not much doubt she would have been high up in
the prize list had it not been that the last runner she got was brought
back dead. It was a wing-tipped cock pheasant that Single roded out and
then chased. But the cock could almost beat the dog by the help of its
wings, and no doubt the Labrador was pretty much blown when she got
hold. Then she had to cross a brook to get back, and it is likely enough
that a stumble, or perhaps jumping against the bank, led to the pinching
of the bird. However, excuses are not admitted in public competitions,
and indeed none was made. In 1905, Single appeared to be quite tender in
the mouth, and although she is admirably broken, and has no excitement
or nervousness, but lots of love of the game, she was not as fortunate
in her opportunities as had been the case the year before, and got no
prize for work although she has lots of merit. Another Labrador at this
meeting got a certificate of merit, so that, as only three entries have
been made all told at retriever trials, the breed has taken a much
better position with spectators than is indicated by its want of success
in gaining stake money.
The private character of the breed for work is very good indeed,
although _some_ of them are reported to turn out rather hard in the
mouth. But then the same thing can be said for every breed of
retrievers. The author remembers Labrador retrievers forty years ago.
The pair he first knew were kept as pets by a rural parson who did not
shoot. It was commonly reported that either of these dogs would dive to
the bottom of a well and fetch up a fourpenny-piece; but this was
hearsay evidence, and was never seen by the present witness. However,
these dogs had just the coat of the present Labradors, and distinctly
not that of the Newfoundland. The only dog of the sort that the author
ever had was death on cats, but this accomplishment did not make him
hard-mouthed with game, as it probably would nine retrievers out of ten.
[Since the above was written, the 1906 retriever trials have passed, but
as the winners all failed with runners the author finds nothing to add
to his general survey.]