SCIENCE 



FRIDAY, JUNE 22, 1888. 



A WRITER TO the Contributors' Club of the July Atlantic rightly 

 says that much time and thought are spent in selecting a name for 

 a play or novel, for it is known that success is largely dependent 

 ■on it, but that parents are strangely careless and unscientific in 

 giving names to children. In the Harvard and Yale catalogues of 

 last year the contributor finds but two or three combinations really 

 good in his opinion. Usually, when a new-comer arrives, some 

 old family name is taken ; or, if the parents exercise an original 

 ■choice, they are too much excited to be guided by any sound 

 ■euphonic principles. They forget that not only from the social 

 point of view it is very advantageous to have one's name remem- 

 bered, but that from the business point of view notoriety is capital, 

 and must be obtained by persistent and ingenious advertising. But 

 if a certain amount of notoriety could be obtained for John Smith 

 by an expenditure of time, money, and ingenuity represented by x, 

 and spread over a period of three years, the Atlantic writer 

 thinks it safe to say that the same amount could be obtained for 

 Hans Arrowsmith by | in eighteen months. Nor does he think 

 the saving of time and money on the part of the knocker at the 

 gate of notoriety the only thing to be considered. The economy of 

 the public stock of energy wasted in innumerable unconscious 

 efforts to remember a name without any corners for the memory 

 to grasp, but persistently thrust before it, would result in an increase 

 ■of available mental force applicable to settling the question of future 

 probation, or to raising the ethical standard, or to reforming the 

 tariff, or to disposing of the surplus. The importance of the sub- 

 ject leads to the suggestion of one or two of what we believe to be 

 the chief fundamental principles of the science of naming children. 

 The system is simple, and any provident parent can easily master 

 and apply it. I. Avoid odd, or eccentric, or poetic combinations, 

 and be guided by euphonic quality only. It is true that an odd 

 name may be remembered, but the associations with it will not be 

 pleasing. The idea of oddity or affectation may attach to the 

 shadowy personality built up in the mind of the public. Under this 

 .rule, hyphenated names, especially hyphenated Christian names, 

 like Floyd-Jones Robinson, are to be avoided. Writing the first 

 given name with an initial and the second in full is also evidently 

 ■opposed to correct scientific principles. 2. The best form of a 

 name is a dactyl and a spondee, like ' Jeremy Taylor.' Every one 

 ■has heard of the ' Shakspeare of divines,' and has a dim idea of an 

 agreeable personality attached to the name. Had his name been 

 ■Charles Taylor, it is far within bounds to say that his reputation 

 would be about one-third of what it is now. 3. If the surname is 

 not one that can be treated according to the above rule, it should 

 te fitted with a given name, such as to bring the combination as 

 nearly as possible to the above length and cadence, as, Sidney 

 Dobell, Ellery Vane, Henry Ward Beecher, Dante Rossetti, Theo- 

 dore Watts, and the like ; or, otherwise, to two long syllables, like 

 Mark Twain or Bret Harte. The subdivisions of this branch of 

 the subject are too numerous to be given, but all rest on principle 

 No. 2. The phonic value of the surname is, under our custom, 

 the controlling element in practically applying the science of names. 

 The great value of names beginning with ' Mac ' or ' O ' is evident, 

 because they so readily combine with the ordinary Christian names. 

 A boy pervades the Atlantic writer's quiet neighborhood simply 

 because his name is Johnny MacWhorter. He is not in any respect 

 a remarkable boy, but his name forces him into prominence by its 



phonic value. There are some ten or twelve boys who are com- 

 rades, but he and another dactyl-spondee boy, Emory Watson, are 

 the only ones ever spoken of. No doubt there are others who do 

 as much mischief and make more noise, but these two reap all the 

 fame. 



The bill creating adepartment of agriculture has been recom- 

 mitted in the Senate, the object of those who voted this disposition 

 of it being to'have restored the section, which had been stricken out, 

 transferring the Weather Bureau to the proposed new department. 

 What the final vote upon this question will be is still in doubt, as is 

 also its wisdom. The Weather Bureau has become a necessity to 

 the people of the United States, who will cheerfully pay the million 

 dollars that it annually costs, but who will insist, that, if any change 

 in the service is made, it shall be certain to bring about an improve- 

 ment, and not a deterioration. The provision of the section in 

 question that gives to all present officers of the Signal Service who 

 shall be transferred to the proposed new department a perpetual 

 tenure of office, at their present pay, making no provision for weed- 

 ing out the worthless men or advancing the competent ones, is 

 certainly not calculated to make the service any better. It would- 

 probably result in the permanent retention of the incompetent, 

 dissipated men in the Weather Bureau ; while the bright men, who 

 would be really useful in the bureau, would prefer other positions, 

 where they might be promoted as they deserved. 



The observations upon which the Weather Bureau bases its cal- 

 culations are now all made by enlisted men of the army, who have 

 been specially instructed and trained for the work. No political 

 influence whatever has been allowed to operate for their appoint- 

 ment, promotion, or retention in the service. It has been the aim 

 of the chief of the Signal Office to send to all important stations men 

 who will be acceptable to the communities in which they are to 

 live and do their work, but no member of Congress has been able 

 to secure the transfer or removal of an observer sergeant in order 

 that some favorite might be put in his place. The security which 

 the observer sergeants have felt for the terms of their enlistment 

 has certainly had a beneficial effect upon the character of the ser- 

 vice they have rendered. It may seem an anomaly to the people 

 that a duty that is in no respect of a military character should be 

 done by soldiers rather than by civilians, but the military organiza- 

 tion of the Weather Bureau has certainly resulted in keeping 

 political influence from dictating in regard to the personnel of a 

 class of men whose appointment and promotion it was very desir- 

 able to keep free from this influence. 



A straw was in the wind the other day which shows the direc- 

 tion it has already taken in anticipation of the change. Mr. Hatch, 

 member of Congress from Missouri, and chairman of the Commit- 

 tee on Agriculture, recently recommended that a certain private in 

 the Signal Service be made a lieutenant, and the entire Missouri 

 delegation joined in the request. When the matter was referred to 

 General Greely, he replied that the promotion could not be made. 

 In the first place, it would be illegal to appoint the man to be a 

 lieutenant unless he was already a sergeant, and he could not be 

 made a sergeant because he was incompetent for the duties of that 

 office. If the man had been a civil officer, or the bureau had been 

 attached to a civil department, he would probably have secured his 

 promotion. A new plan to transform the Weather Bureau from a 



