[ London Times ]
This newspaper, most correctly known simply as The Times, began publication in 1785 and continues to this day.
The edition of Feb 5, 1835 carried the following account of a trial involving a Newfoundland mix attacking a child:
This trial, M'Comte v. Reeveley, was brought in an attempt to "recover reasonable compensation" for an injury to plaintiff's son, who was attacked by a Newfoundland. According to one young witness, as a group of boys was playing a dog suddenly appeared and
... flew at the plaintiff's son's feet, and then at his face, and pitched him down and cut the back of his head; the dog had a thin bit of leather coming round his eyes; a man took the dog away. The dog tried to worry his face.
An older witness confirms the breed:
I saw a large Newfoundland dog in Cleveland-street with two gentlemen. I saw the dog fly at the boy very violently. I observed one of the gentlemen take the dog off the boy, who was on the ground, with the dog on top of him. A woman picked up the boy. His head was cut, and the blood was coming from his nose and mouth.
The dog's owner was followed to his house, and when confronted offered no apology or compensation for the boy's injuries. Yet another witness offered an account of an earlier incident which confirms the ill temperament of both dog and owner:
I know this dog. I saw him in April last. He came out of defendant's year and flew at me, and caught my glove, and tore it from my hand. A man whistled and drew it away. I told a man on the premises, and he said I had better keep at home.
A policeman confirmed the dog's vicious nature with the following testimony:
I have known the dog twelve months. I was a policeman in June in Cleveland-street. There were many people at M'Comte's door, and he told me the gentleman would not give his address. I told the plaintiff it was defendant's dog. The gentleman who was with the dog called me aside, and said the dog had knocked the boy down, but did not fly at him. I told him the dog ought to be muzzled, and the gentleman then drew a muzzle from his pocket. He said the dog was the defendant's. About half past 8 at night, on the 6th, I saw the gentleman with the dog, which sprang at me. I could not get my staff out, or I should have been as nimble as him. He is a very savage dog, and would fly at any cue....
Additional witnesses confirm the size of the dog — "very large" — and one witness describes the dog's coloring as "blue-black and white." One of the lawyers clarifies that the dog is "a mastiff of the Newfoundland breed," by which he means "a dog between a mastiff and Newfoundland."
A witness for the defendant claims that the dog accidentally knocked the boy down when he and his friends ran past its kennel, and that the dog was not in the least vicious or bad-tempered. One of the defendant's servants also confirms that the dog was "very quiet and docile; there could not be a better-tempered dog," and a friend of the injured boy testifies that he has often played in the defendant's yard with his son and the dog, which was always very friendly. Several other friends of the defendant affirm the dog's friendly nature, but the jury wasn't convinced, and found for the plaintiff, awarding 5£ 1s. 6d.