priate than the wholesale importation ever going on of foreign appellations representing remote nations, and ages still more remote. Why boggle over a few uncertain Indian etymologies when we have been swallowing for generations the most astounding, incongruous, and inappropriate combinations which the ignorance or the misapplied ingenuity of man could apply to designate our towns? If it is said that Indian names mean nothing to us, we may reply that neither do the old English names, in nine cases out of ten, mean anything in America. Norfolk and Suffolk, widespread names as they are among us, are not apprehended by Americans, who pronounce them, as meaning North folk and South folk-their primary signification. Nor, even if they were, would they have the slightest applicability to any of the towns and counties they here represent. Is it any more inapposite or misleading to diffuse these aboriginal names over our new States and Territories, than to keep on forever creating the fiftieth Brownsville or the hundredth Johnstown, or the thousandth Jonesboro? How much better would it have been to name New York City, "Manhattan," than to perpetuate in that great metropolis the ignoble name of a graceless royal English duke! As between names native to the soil, and euphonious in speech, but with only partial fitness, and foreign names with no fitness at all, we may well prefer the former. One of the most prolific sources from which our names of places have been drawn is the Biographical Dictionary. Beginning with the line of Presidents of the United States, each of whom has from three to thirty-two towns called after his name, we have a long catalogue of statesmen, politicians, military and naval officers, authors, inventors, and men of science who have given names more or less widely distributed. Alexander Hamilton is commemorated by no less than 30 cities or towns, Clinton by 30, Webster by 24, Benton by 20, Calhoun by 13, Clay by 7 (besides many compounds), Quincy by 19, Douglas by 21, and Blaine by 20. In many cases of places named after minor politicians, we are left to wonder whether the chief object might have been to give to some local celebrity of the hour his sole chance of being remembered at all. Of all Americans, the illustrious Dr. Franklin has the honor of leading in the choice of his name for places all over the land. His list (including compounds of the name) numbers 63. Andrew Jackson comes next with 61 towns, then Washington with 49, Jefferson with 47, Madison with 44, Monroe with 43, and Garfield with 24. Among generals of the Army, Marion heads the list with 30 towns, Warren 25, La Fayette (in various forms) 55, Montgomery 17, Stark 14, St. Clair 11, De Kalb 10, Knox 10, Pulaski 11, Sheridan 22, and the various Lees 24. Of naval officers, 20 towns are named for Commodore Perry, 17 for Decatur, 16 for Elliott, and 8 for Bainbridge. In the list of authors, it is interesting to note that the British take the lead in the adoption of their names, there being 31 towns named Milton, 18 Byron, 14 Addison, and 10 Burns, while Irving names 21 towns, Cooper 13, Bryant 11, Emerson 9, Bancroft 9, and Hawthorne 6. The great scientist Humboldt has 12 towns called after his name, Newton 19, and Darwin 5. The early American discoverers and explorers have been, with the sole exceptions of Columbus and Americus Vespucius, almost wholly neglected. The former is commemorated in 20 towns named Columbus, and 27 Columbias. Five places are named Americus and 3 America. While Raleigh and De Soto, La Salle and Marquette, Hennepin and Hudson, are remembered, Champlain has but a single place called after his name, while Roberval, De Monts, Argall, Iberville, Frobisher, Gorges, Cartier, Balboa, Dablon, Bressani, Baffin, Bering, and Gosnold have none. What could be more appropriate than to render some measure of historical justice, however tardy, to these and many other explorers and voyagers, by bestowing their names upon some part of the country which they helped to throw open to civilization? The early history of the continent, concerning which new and profound interest has lately developed, would thus be suggestively connected with names worthy of remembrance, and the young would learn geography and history, biography and the annals of discovery, by being put upon inquiry into the origin of such names of places. There is one excuse for the universal duplication of the most common-place names throughout the United States, and that is, the unexampled rapidity of its settlement. Emigrants into a new and undeveloped region experience as one of their first wants that of a name for each new place or settlement. Thus it is that the westward-moving wave of population bears with it a whole vocabulary derived from the region it left behind. The emigrants naturally bestow names long familiar, whether commemorative of families, natural features, or abstract qualities, upon the settlements which they found in the wilderness. These names, once fixed, generally remain unchanged. Hence the importance of giving a broader and better scope to our local nomenclature, and by the diffusion of wide intelligence as to the rich field of neglected names, aboriginal and other, opening a way for radical improvement. In the good work of reform in this direction, what more appropriate agency could be invoked than our historical societies, national and local? It is theirs to watch with sedulous care every phase of the country's development, and to conserve whatever is best and most important in the past for the benefit of the present and the future. Our institutions of learning also, as well as the local societies, now so numerous, devoted to history, should foster the study of local antiquities and early explorations in their neighborhood, and thus, each from its own center of influence, contribute to enlighten public opinion on the subject of a better local nomenclature. This association might do much to diffuse information by digesting tables of suitable names of historic or native significance, or, in due time, recommending to the postal authorities lists of proper designations for new post-offices. Already much has been done by the exercise of wise discretion by successive Postmasters-General. We have got rid of such names as Hardscrabble, Buzzard Roost, and Yuba Dam, in favor of better and more decent appellations. Let the good work go on, and many more ridiculous and inappropriate names be reformed out of existence. Good names, once bestowed, are among the most lasting of things earthly. They may change in form, but they rarely perish. They outlast dynasties, they outlive generations and ages of men-they are in a word, perennial. So much the more important is it that their survival should be, so far as it can be made to be, a survival of the fittest. |