]VORK OF THE BOARD OX GEOGRAPHIC NAMES 
222 
During the five years or more of its existence the board has 
held 48 meetings and has decided 2,835 cases. Its modus ope- 
raudiis simple and direct. The cases of dis]nited nomenclature 
which reach it are referred at once to an executive committee 
consisting at present of the representatives of the Geological 
Surve.y, Navy Department, and Coast and Geodetic Survey. An 
investigation of each case is made by this executive committee, 
which reports it, with recommendations, to the board, which 
makes a final decision. For such decision a majority of the 
entire board is necessaiy. It not infrequently happens, there- 
fore, that it is only by a unanimous vote of those present at a 
meeting that definite action can be taken. 
Geographic names ma}" be broadh’' distinguished into two 
classes : tliose which are established b}'- usage, commonly local 
usage, and those which are not so established. In regard to the 
former class, the primary })rincii>le which controls the decisions 
of the board is that local usage ouglit to prevail. What the 
people call themselves and what they call tlie natural features 
lying within their jurisdiction should, unless there is good 
reason to the contrary, be the names thereof. That tliis is just 
and proj)er surely goes without sa}dng. In general, every man 
has a right to insist that other people call him by the name 
which he selects and accept that spelling of his name which he 
chooses to adopt. The rights which a man has over his own 
name, a community has over its own name and over the names 
of all natural features hung within its jurisdiction. Lest it 
should appear that I am dwelling too much on this aspect of 
the case and arguing a self-evident proi>osition, let me quote 
from an article recently published in Justus Perthes’ Geograph- 
ische Mittheilungen, which will show that there are men, and 
men of eminence, too, who do not accept this principle. 
“Tlie practical Americans have had since 1890 a Bureau of Geographic 
Names. . . . The establishment of this Bureau on Geograpliic Names 
and its first decisions were referred to in our last report. We gave a 
hearty greeting to the new creation, and added to the greeting a few sug- 
gestions; but these have not been considered. Nay, more, tlie later de- 
cisions of the board, about 700 in number, relating to geographic names 
at home and abroad, correspond still less to the most reasonable expecta- 
tions. We miss the principle that the original form of the name, the 
meaning and etymology of the name, the motive for naming, is to be con- 
sidered, and considered first and foremost. We miss the scientific spirit, 
which, instead of cleaving to the form, unlocks the intrinsic meaning, 
and accordingly we miss in the works of a government board of names 
all evidence of acquaintance with toponymic literature.” 
