[Mike1975]

Rawdon B. Lee in 1894 wrote the book "A history and description of the modern dogs of Great Britain and Ireland - The terriers"
https://archive.org/stream/moderndog.../n385/mode/2up

"The charming, aristocratic little dog we now know as the Yorkshire terrier has been identified as such for but a comparatively short period, the Kennel Club adopting this nomenclature in their Stud Book for 1886. Prior to this date the name had been hanging about him for some few years, because the names of rough, broken-haired, or Scotch terrier, under which he was first known, were most misleading. During the early days of dog shows the classes in which he competed included terriers of almost any variety, from the cross-bred mongrel to the Dandie Dinmont, the Skye terrier, and the Bedlington. Indeed, twenty years since it was no uncommon sight to see wire-haired fox terriers figuring with others of a silkier coat under the one common head of "rough or broken-haired terriers." As a fact, a broken-haired terrier should have been altogether a short-coated dog the Yorkshire is long-coated to a greater extent than any other variety of the terrier; nor was the title Scotch terrier, by which he was most frequently known, at all adaptable to him.

How the name of Scotch terrier became attached to a dog which so thoroughly had its home in Yorkshire and Lancashire is somewhat difficult to determine, if it can be determined at all, but a very old breeder of the variety told me that the first of them originally came from Scotland, where they had been accidentally produced from a cross between the silky-coated Skye terrier (the Clydesdale) and the black and tan terrier. One could scarcely expect that a pretty dog, partaking in a degree after both its parents, could be produced from a first cross between a smooth-coated dog, and a long-coated bitch or vice versa. Maybe, two or three dogs so bred had been brought by some of the Paisley weavers into Yorkshire, and there, suitably admired, pains were taken to perpetuate the strain. There appears to be something feasible and practical in this story, and I am sorry that when the information was given me, nearly a quarter of a century since, by a Yorkshire weaver then sixty years old and since dead, I did not obtain more particulars about what was in his day called the Scotch terrier."

There is great deal of information in the book "The American Book of the Dog" written in 1891.

https://archive.org/stream/americanb...arch/yorkshire

There, P.H. Coombs who was an American pioneer of the breed, provides us with some answers gathering the story from the last of the generation who knew the yorkie's beginning. He is quoting various writers and their research about the origin of the breed including Shaw, Dalziel and Stonehenge.

There he quotes a 1887 article for the magazine "English Stock-Keeper", written by author G.H. Wilkinson

https://archive.org/stream/americanb...arch/yorkshire

"In commencing an article on the Yorkshire Terrier, it is necessary to trace back its origin as far as possible. With this object in view, I have been at some trouble in looking up several old fanciers, one of whom, John Richardson, of Halifax, is now in his sixty-seventh year. And very interesting it was to hear this aged man go back to the "good old days" of over half a century ago. I regret, however, that, although we can find men who have been in the fancy so long, the origin of the Yorkshire Terrier is somewhat obscure.
Fifty years ago, there was in Halifax, and the immediate neighborhood, a type of dog called at that time (and even within these last twenty years) a " Waterside Terrier; " a little game dog, varying in weight from six to twenty pounds, mostly about ten pounds weight a dog resembling very much the present Welsh and Airedale Terrier on a small scale. At this period, these dogs were bred for the purpose of hunting and killing rats. They would go into the river and work with a ferret, and were just in their element when put into a rat-pit. An almost daily occurrence, at that time, was to back them to kill a given number of rats in a given time. It seems almost a pity that such a breed should have become extinct.
Mr. Richardson himself owned a little bitch called Polly, who weighed six pounds, and she was frequently put into a rat-pit with a dozen rats, the whole of which she would speedily kill against time. She would also swim the river and hunt with the ferret. This little bitch, I am told, had four or five inches of coat on each side of her body, with a white or silver head. At that time, however, the average specimen was a shorter-coated dog, with grizzle-gray, hardish coat. It however seems to me, and is also the opinion of many old fanciers whom I have consulted, that they were the ancestors for the present breed. There is no doubt, also, that the blood of the Skye Terrier was introduced at some remote period, which may account for the longer coat and long body that existed some ten or fifteen years later. No care or definite object, however, seems to have been aimed at in breeding, at this time, beyond getting a dog thoroughly game. It seems that it was more by good luck than management that, about twenty or thirty years ago, a longer and softer coated dog became known. It must also be borne in mind that at this time their coats were not cultivated as they were later on. Dog shows were almost unknown in those days, and even later were scarce."

He also mentions Mr. James Watson's article, published in the Century Magazine of 1886 :

https://archive.org/stream/americanb...arch/yorkshire

"Some of our authorities have attempted to throw a great deal of mystery about the origin of the Yorkshire Terrier, where none really exists. If we consider that the mill operatives who originated the breed by careful selection of the best long-coated small Terriers they could find were nearly all ignorant men, unaccustomed to imparting information for public use, we may see some reason why reliable facts have not been easily attained. These early writers show but little knowledge of the possibilities of selection. Stonehenge, (referring to John Henry Walsh) for instance, in his early editions, speaks of its being impossible for a dog with a three-inch coat and seven-inch beard to be a descendant of the soft-coated Scotch Terrier, without a cross of some kind. The absurdity of this is seen when we remember that within a few years of the date of his history, Yorkshire Terriers were shown with twelve inches of coat.

Then, again, he speaks of the King Charles Spaniel as being employed to give the blue and tan, than which a more ridiculous statement could not have been penned. To get a blue-and-tan, long, straight, silky coat, breeders were not likely to employ a black-and-tan dog with a wide chest, tucked-up loin, a round, bullet head, large, protruding eyes, and heavy Spaniel ears. The idea is too absurd to be entertained for a moment. As arrayed against all the conjectures of theorists, I have in my possession a letter from Mrs. M. A. Foster, of Bradford, England, who in writing of the dog Bradford Hero, the winner of ninety-seven first prizes, says: " The pedigree of Bradford Hero includes all the best dogs for thirty-five years back, and they were all originally bred from Scotch Terriers, and shown as such until a few years back. The name of Yorkshire Terrier was given to them on account of their being improved so much in Yorkshire."