baptism

I doubt that the first recorded instance would be reliable but take this for what it is worth http://www.oldpaths.com/archive/bailey/john/carlos/1903/Articles/baptismi.html
i.e. Google for "infant baptism" recorded

But you can also search Logos for

"infant baptism" NEAR recorded

or

"infant baptism" NEAR century

Most likely Acts 16:15,33; 18:8; 1 Cor 1:16 ...More clearly: (Sorry but I've not converted these to Logos links). EDIT The following is taken from another site - edited down to what is historical. I do see that I accidentally included one clause that is conclusion not quotation or description. I have removed it.

In the year 215 AD, the Church Father St. Hippolytus of Rome writes:

"And they shall Baptize the little children first. And if they
can answer for themselves, let them answer. But if they cannot, let
their parents answer or someone from their family." (Hippolytus
of Rome, Apostolic Tradition, 21 c. AD 215).

Now, St. Hippolytus was the disciple of St. Irenaeus of Lyon; and, in
AD 180, St. Irenaeus writes:

"For He came to save all through Himself --all, I say, who
through Him are born again to God [i.e., Baptized] -- infants, and
children, and boys, and youths, and old men." (Irenaeus, Against
the Heresies 2:22:4 -- c. AD 180)

St. Irenaeus was the disciple of St. Polycarp, who was the disciple
of the Apostle John himself (as well as an associate of the Apostle
Philip). And, in AD 155, St. Polycarp said this at his execution:

"Polycarp declared, 'Eighty and six years have I served Him,
and He never did me injury. How can I blaspheme my King and
Savior?" (Polycarp, Martyrdom of Polycarp 9 c. AD 156)

Now, it is well documented that "The Martyrdom of Polycarp"
was written the year after the saint's execution; and so the quote above
is extremely reliable. It is also well documented that Polycarp was 86
years old at the time of his death. Therefore, if the saint claims to
have served Jesus for 86 years, it therefore follows that he was
Baptized as an infant. And, in another place, we are told that
Polycarp was Baptized by none other than the Apostle John!

Furthermore, here are some more Church Fathers on infant Baptism.

St. Justin Martyr (150 AD):

"And both men and women who have been Christ's disciples since
infancy, remain pure, and at the age of sixty or seventy years
..." (Justin Martyr, First Apology,15:6 -- AD 110-165)

Origen (244 AD):

"Baptism is given for the remission of sins; and according to
the usage of the Church, Baptism is given even to infants. And,
indeed, if there were nothing in infants that required the remission
of sins and nothing in them pertinent to forgiveness, the grace of
Baptism would be superfluous." (Origen, Homily on Leviticus 8:3
-- AD 244)

St. Cyprian (250 AD)

"But in respect to the case of infants, which you say ought
not to be Baptized within the second or third day after their birth,
and that the law of ancient circumcision should be regarded, so that
you think one who is just born should not be Baptized and sanctified
within the eighth day ....And therefore, dearest brother, this was our
opinion in council, that by us no one ought to be hindered from
Baptism ...we think is to be even more observed in respect of infants
and newly-born persons." (Cyprian, Epistle 58, To Fides [54] --
AD 251)

St. Gregory Nazianzus (381 AD)

"Be it so, some will say, in the case of those who ask for
Baptism; what have you to say about those who are still children and
conscious neither of the loss nor of grace? Are we to Baptize them
too? Certainly, if any danger presses. For it is better that they
should be unconsciously sanctified than that they should depart
unsealed and uninitiated." (Gregory Nazianzus, Oration on Holy
Baptism, 40:28 -- AD 381)

St. John Chrysostom (388 AD)

"We do Baptize infants, although they are not guilty of any
[personal] sins." (John Chrysostom, Ad Neophytos -- AD 388)

St. Ambrose (387 AD)

"Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Spirit, he
cannot enter the kingdom of God. No one is excepted: not the infant,
not the one prevented by some necessity." (Ambrose of Milan,
Abraham 2,11,84 -- AD 387) 

St. Augustine (415 AD)

"Likewise, whoever says that those children who depart out of
this life without partaking of that Sacrament (Baptism) are alive in
Christ, certainly contradicts the apostolic declaration and condemns
the universal Church, in which it is the practice to lose no time and
run in haste to administer Baptism to infant children, because it is
believed as an indubitable truth, that otherwise they cannot be made
alive in Christ." (Augustine, Epistle 167 -- AD 415)

Council of Carthage (418 AD)

"Canon 2: Likewise it has been decided that whoever says that
infants fresh from their mother's wombs should not be Baptized ...let
him be anathema." (Council of Carthage, AD 418)

Here's a good possibility - The rest of the article can be found here ~~> http://www.christiancourier.com/articles/1540-a-history-of-the-baptism-apostasy

Best of all, Meyer's Commentary (soon to be released) is quoted in this article [see the part in bold italics].

Infant Baptism

Since both faith and repentance are conditions leading to New Testament baptism, naturally infants are excluded (Mark 16:16; Acts 2:38). Infants have not the mental capacity to believe in Christ, and they cannot repent for they “have no knowledge of good or evil.” (Deuteronomy 1:39) Hence, the practice of “infant baptism” is unknown to Holy Scripture.

The first possible allusion to infant baptism is by Irenaeus (ca. A.D. 140-203), a 2nd century theologian in Gaul. “He [Christ] came to save, through means of himself, all who through him are born again unto God, infants, and children, and boys, and youths, and old men” (Against Heresies, 2.22.4; ANF, 1.391). But a contemporary, Tertullian (ca. 150- 222 A.D.), a scholar in the Roman province of Africa, opposed the practice:

“Let them come while they are growing up; let them come while they are learning, while they are being taught to what it is they are coming; let them become Christians when they are susceptible of the knowledge of Christ. What haste to procure the forgiveness of sins for the age of innocence! … Let them first learn to feel their need of salvation; so it may appear that we have given to those that wanted” (On Baptism, xviii; ANF, 3.678).

Augustus Neander, a Lutheran historian, made this important comment: “Tertullian appears as a zealous opponent of infant baptism; a proof that the practice had not as yet come to be regarded as an apostolical institution; for otherwise Tertullian hardly would have ventured to express himself so strongly against it” (1850, 1.432). Neander also acknowledged that: “Baptism at first was administered only to adults,” because baptism and faith were “strictly connected” (1.430).

Although Tertullian opposed infant baptism, he did “fertilize the soil” for its ready acceptance by others. He taught that the human spirit, like the body, is transmitted from parent to child (Strong, 1976, 493). Thus, man inherits both a blemished soul and body. Cyprian, in the 3rd century, reasoned:

“But again, if even the chief of sinners, who have been exceedingly guilty before God, receive the forgiveness of sins on coming to the faith, and no one is precluded from baptism and from grace, how less should the child be kept back, which, as it is but just born, can not have sinned, but has only brought with it, by its descent from Adam, the infection of the old death; and which may the more easily obtain the remission of sins, because the sins which are forgiven it are not its own, but those of another” (Epistle,lviii.5; ANF, 5.354).

Origen (ca. A.D.185-254), another post-apostolic writer, erroneously declares:

“Little children are baptized for the remission of sins. Whose sins are they? When did they sin? Or how can this explanation of the baptismal washing be maintained in the case of small children, except according to the interpretation we spoke of a little earlier? No man is clean of stain, not even if his life upon the earth had lasted but a single day” (Homilies in Luke, xiv.5; Lienhard, 1996, 58).

The practice of infant baptism did not become common until the 5th century, after the writings of the North African theologian Augustine had popularized the theory of “original sin.” Even Philip Schaff, a member of the Reformed Church, and a strong pedo-baptist advocate, was forced to admit that “adult baptism was the rule, infant baptism the exception” until the church was fairly established in the Roman Empire. He points out that Augustine, Gregory Nazianzen, and Chrysostom had “Christian” mothers, yet these men were not baptized until early manhood (1884, I.210).

H.A.W. Meyer (1800-1873) was one of the most prominent commentators produced by the German Lutheran Church. He thus had no intrinsic bias against infant baptism, yet in his commentary on Acts [16:15], he wrote: “The baptism of the children of Christians, of which no trace is found in the N.T., is not to be held as an apostolic ordinance, as, indeed, it encountered early and long resistance; but it is an institution of the church, which gradually arose in post-apostolic times…” (1883, 312).

The practice of “baptizing” infants is a human tradition, utterly void of biblical sanction. It instills a false sense of confidence in youngsters as they grow up, and is a hindrance to genuine obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

I hope this helps!

DAL