264. National Geographic Magazine. 
referred to may be included in one question, and when we attempt 
to determine that which is best they become very perplexing. In 
seeking advice we are met with a variety of views ; some will 
maintain that we should take the nick-names given by the fish- 
ermen ; some prefer names that have been recognized independ- 
ent of nick-names; some will abhor corruptions, while others 
prefer the corruptions, if expressive and in general use: The ex- 
perts are very prone to hunting up the root, or, if necessary, to 
constructing one, and throwing out everything that will not con- 
form with it. The fact that our country was settled by French, 
Spanish, and English, and that many names are derived from the 
Indian dialects, also causes peculiar difficulties in treating some 
sections. The rules of the Royal Geographical Society can be a 
great help, so far as they are applicable ; they seem to have been 
used in the modern spelling of “‘ Dakota”—for the man-of-war we 
had of this name some years ago, it was spelled “ Dacotah,” but 
in the name of the States recently admitted to the Union, “k” 
has been substituted for the hard “c” and the final “h” has been 
dropped. There is also great disagreement as to the propriety of 
the use of the possessive case; some will not admit it at all, 
others would like to drop the apostrophe and retain the “s” in 
certain cases for euphony: this is a question that requires special 
consideration in each case, as the omission of the possessive will 
sometime give the name a descriptive meaning not at all appli- 
cable to the locality or feature. The propriety of personal names 
is also questioned by many, and may lead to continued discus- 
sion in Alaskan nomenclature, where explorers and surveyors 
have been so liberal in bestowing new names on the same places. 
It would seem to be a good rule in selecting a new name to fol- 
low the old Indian custom of describing the place. An oppor- 
tunity for an expressive nomenclature seems to have been lost 
in the north-west in transferring so many of our eastern names, 
instead of selecting new names from the rich native vocabularies. 
As different bureaus may be governed by different principles, 
and may not even be consistent in their own rulings, through new 
principles that may come in by the frequent change of personnel, 
it has heretofore been impracticable to secure uniformity, and dis- 
puted questions have been carried along for years. The board 
that has been organized is in the direction of developing uni- 
formity in the practice of all. It is no easy task, but if guided 
by a generous spirit, willing to yield a little here and there, its 
object may be successfully accomplished. 
