Mt. Rainier or Mt. Tacoma — Which? 



95 



MT. RAINIER OR MT. TACOMA-WHICH? 



By Alexander McAdie. 



The following editorial, recently published in a western 

 paper and in character not unlike numerous others appearing 

 in eastern papers, will be read with interest by many and the 

 question naturally asked, Why not make the change? 



Tacoma is a far finer name than Rainier. This is historically and 

 esthetically right, notwithstanding the arbitrary decree of the U. S. 

 Geographic Board, which some fifteen years ago ordered that the 

 mountain should be called Rainier and not Tacoma. Historically, this 

 decree has no reasonable foundation. It (sic) was conferred on the 

 mountain by Vancouver in honor of a British naval officer who hap- 

 pened to be his friend. Why should an American mountain be named 

 after a Britisher who never saw it? 



On the other hand, Tacoma is an Indian name, racy of the soil 

 and connected with a most interesting body of aboriginal folk lore. 

 The ruthless, blundering hand of a Washington bureau shot , not 

 destroy these links with the past. 



I hold no brief for the Board of Geographic Names; but it 

 may be assumed that that board in this as in other decisions 

 acted only after investigation and with a full knowledge of the 

 historic facts. It is unnecessary to add that the board was not 

 influenced in its judgment by clamor or any question of adver- 

 tising value. 



The Sierra Club, an organization of nearly two thousand 

 mountain lovers, stands committed to the use of original names 

 when duly authenticated, and in several instances has pleaded 

 for the retention of significant and appropriate Indian or 

 Spanish designations. Wherever possible it prefers the use 

 of original designation. 



Some years ago the club was asked to lend support to a 

 movement to substitute the name Tacoma for Rainier. At the 

 request of the Board of Directors, Professor George Davidson 

 then Professor of Geography in the University of California 

 and for thirty years head of the United States Coast Survey 

 on the Pacific Slope, made a thorough investigation of the 

 claims advanced by the proponents for the change. Although 



