"Hot Dog" in 1872?

[Douglas G. Wilson]

At 09:37 PM 10/24/2003 -0400, you wrote:
>All right, get a load of this article found through American Periodical
>Series.  I can't believe this is really a usage of _hot dog_
>'frankfurter,' but the words "This is no sausage shop" could be read to
>mean that the speaker is referring to a "cold dog" or "hot dog" or
>"lukewarm dog" as a sausage.  At the least this could be considered to be
>a usage of _dog_ 'sausage'.
>
>1872 _Saturday Evening Post_ 27 July 8
>Organist (angrily) -- I called to get Martini's Ecole d'Orgue.  I see it
>advertised, and I want it.  Now, have you got that Ecole d'Orgue or not?
>If you have, run it out, for I'm in a hurry.
>Salesman -- You must take me for a fool, don't you?  This is no sausage
>shop.  This is a music store.  What do you suppose we know about Martini's
>cold dog, or his hot dog, or his lukewarm dog, or any other dog belonging
>to any other man?  You must be crazy.  We don't deal in dogs.  Martini
>never left his dog around here anywhere.  Why, you talk like a --
>(suddenly calling to his fellow clerk) -- I say John here's a demented old
>idiot in here wanting to buy some kind of an Italian cold dog.

It MAY imply "dogs" = "sausages", but maybe not.

Imagine the same joke with "sausage shop" replaced with "chow mein shop"
for example, in which case it would be read to imply (yuk, yuk)  that dogs
would be in supply at such a shop, presumably for inclusion in the cuisine
(without implying that the chow mein was named or called "dog[s]"). The
passage as given above may imply only that dogs were considered a likely
component of sausages ... and they were so considered, in that epoch and
since -- humorously and otherwise.

"We don't deal in dogs" tends to favor the possibility of "dogs" =
"sausages" but "Martini never left his dog ..." tends to contradict it
IMHO. Furthermore I believe "deal in dogs" could be read as "buy dogs"
(with or without "sell dogs").

-- Doug Wilson