If the Fox-terrier is not the most popular of all breeds, at any rate he occupies a very exalted position in the hearts of the dog-loving public ; while equally certain is it that he embodies most of those qualities that go to make up an ideal Terrier. There are, however, individuals who, in their over-zealousness for the breed whose cause they have espoused, would go, and do go, a step farther, and assert that he is the only true Terrier. Still other admirers are there who, while they are ready to recognise that there may be other breeds with some slight claim to the name and qualities of a Terrier, to compare any one of them with the Fox-terrier is absurd. This breed-worship is by no means confined to the Fox-terrier fancier, but applies with almost equal force to the enthusiastic section of every variety of dog.

There is scarcely any breed whose evolution has been more hotly discussed than that of the Fox-terrier. Some writers are inclined to take the whole of the credit for the perfected form of the dog for the modern fancier; but the majority appear to think that half a century or more ago as good dogs were to be found.

Mr. T. H. Scott, who contributed the article on the Fox-terrier to the First Edition of "British Dogs," and whose opinions are entitled to great respect, wrote thus in connection with the early history of the breed: "Among all those who have written on Fox-terriers of late years, none appears to have been inclined to go to the root of the matter, and tell us anything of the origin and early history of this breed. A general idea seems to prevail that Fox-terriers are a production of modern times, and this idea has, no doubt, been fostered by the way in which spurious imitations of them have been from time to time manufactured, and by the ignorance of judges who have permitted various and very opposite types to find favour. The Fox-terrier proper is not a modern breed, and perhaps there were as good dogs fifty years ago as there are now."

Mr. J. A. Doyle, in his contribution to Vero Shaw's "Book of the Dog," says : "The antiquity and the precise origin of the modern Fox-terrier are involved in considerable obscurity."

Both writers just quoted recognise the difficulties in the way of clearing up the origin of this breed by tracing it to its sources, knowing that there are missing links in the chain of evidence very near to the end of it which we now hold.

Though a good many practical writers claim the modern Fox-terrier as a descendant of the Hound for the fox and the badger of Dr. Caius, none insists on direct descent without intermixtures of blood, but rely on the inference drawn from the fact that, through all the centuries since Caius, as probably for many more centuries before his time, the Terrier was used for the same work; and it is, and has been, the practice to use the animals we have suited to our several purposes, whilst ever attempting to improve them. Such attempts result in some modifications, but the work of the dog remains the same. The fox and the badger in their form, nature, and habits being unchanged, the dog used to follow them into their "terriers" would, of necessity, be kept of certain character or type, however modified in trivial points.

The word Terrier as applied to dogs is from the French terrier, out of the Low Latin terrarium, and this again from the Latin terra, clearly indicating that the dog is one that burrows, or goes to earth after his quarry. The suitability of the term is also enhanced when it is recollected that the hole, berry, burrow, or earth of rabbit, fox, or badger, is also called in French a "terrier." The prefix "fox " to this particular variety shows him to have been selected from others as specially suited to bolt that animal.

Dr. Caius disappointingly gives us no description of the Terrier. He, however, gives us a fair picture of the dog at work. Writing of Hounds, he sandwiches the Terrier between the Harrier and the Bloodhound in these words : "Another sorte there is which hunteth the foxe and the badger or greye onely, whom we call Terrars, because they (after the manner and custom of ferrets in hunting for connyes) creepe into the grounde, and by that means make afrayde, nyppe and byte the foxe and the badger, in such sorte, that eyther they teare them in pieces with theyre teeth, beying in the bosome of the earth, or else hayle and pull them perforce out of their lurking angles, dark dongeons, and close caves, or, at the least, through conceived feare, drive them out of their hollow harbours, insomuch that they are compelled to prepare speedy flight, and being desirous of the next (albeit not the safest) refuge, are otherwise taken and intrapped with snares and nettes layde over holes to the same purpose."

It is to be regretted that Dr. Caius did not write a description of these Terriers. There were, however, several writers about dogs contemporary with Caius, or very near his time, among them being De Fouilloux, Stevens, and Liebault - all French authors - and Turberville, Surflet, Goodge, and other English writers dealing more or less with dogs, who have, partially at least, made up for this omission. The works of De Fouilloux, a contemporary writer with Stevens, a physician of Paris, are not well known. Liebault, also, a doctor of medicine, simply edited and added to Dr. Stevens's "Maison Rustique," but added nothing that concerns us here. Surflet, another physician, translated Dr. Stevens's book.

Taking the description of the Fox-terrier of that date, as given by Stevens through Surflet, and comparing it with that given by Turberville, there is an agreement in the main, yet with such difference as to make it clear that they did not copy the one from the other, and possibly that Turberville, the earlier translator, did not even consult Stevens, although that author's date would have enabled him to do so. As Turberville admits having taken his matter from various authors, and as his contemporaries and he agree in substance, it seems as if all of them (including De Fouilloux) had taken their matter to a great extent from still older writers, with all too slight, and most certainly with too indefinite, acknowledgment. Finger-posts to indicate the way to these older writers are, however, wanting. It would serve no good purpose to traverse the well-trodden ground dealing with the ancient history of the Fox-terrier, and covering the time when Dr. Stevens wrote the work above named to that when Sydenham Edwards issued his "Cynographia Britannica " in 1800, or Samuel Howitt "The British Sportsman" in 1812. Those desirous of doing so should consult "The Fox-terrier Monograph," published by Mr. L. Upcott Gill, or " The Fox-terrier," issued by Mr. Horace Cox.