American Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Ohio) 1855-1860, 1855-03-29

ofs.
The late Bishop Chase, of Illinois, had a
dislike to having Greek and Roman names
imposed upon children which he display
ed very pointedly on one occasion when
child was brought to him to be baptised.
Name this child, said the Bishop.
Marcus Tullius Cicero answered the
father.
'What?'
Marcus Tullius Cicero.
'Tutl tut! with your heather nonsence!-
Peter, baptise tbee,' and the child was
Peter henceforth and forever.
Others, again, set much store on Scrip
ture names, many of which TO our ears are
anything but melodious. for instance, Oba-
diah, jeremiah; and all the other iahs; but
this fashion is not so prevalent as it was a
century or two ago. Some of the Bible
names have much sweetness, such as Beul
all, Ruhamah and Rhoda, but even these
are rarely used.
The story is well known of the man who,
having called four sons after Mathew, Mark,
Luke and John, wishing TO have the fifth
christened Ads, because, as lie said, he
wanted to compliment the Apostle Bit
but the sequel, as given by Mr.. Lower, in
the last edition of his valuable work, on
English Surnames,' is not so familiar to
us. 1t appears that the father had two
sons, who were christened Richard and
Thomas; and that the story of the name
that had been proposed for No. 5, getting
wind among his acquaintance, he was con
stantly annoyed by having this distich re-
peated, of better metre than rhyme
Mathew, Mark, Luke and John,
| Acts of 'Postles, Dick and Tom.'
Some person appears to have tried how
near they could come to the height of alb
surdity, in giving names to their children.
Benjamin Slokely the first white settler in
Mercer county, Pennsylvania (whose ac-
count thereof is in the fourth volme of the
Memoirs ofthe Historical Society of Penn
sylvania, gave most extraordinary names
to all his children; at present, but one of
them occurs to our mind-Aurora Borealis
by which he thought proper to designate
one of his daughters. A Mr.. Stickney, a
distant relative of DR.. Franklin, numbered
his children, calling them One Stickney,
Two Stickney, &c. We might mention
here the case of Mr.. New, who, it is said
called his first child Something, and the
next Nothing; but the story is probably
the creation of the fertile Imagination of
Mr.. Joseph Miller, or some of his success
sors.
We will venture to add few rules which
are the results of our reflections upon this
subject.
/. The son should not be called after
his father, nor the daughter after her moth
er.
The object of giving first names is 10
) distinguish a person from all others bear
ing the same last name, particularly from
those of his immediate family; but this
latter is not attained when child bears
the name of its parent. Confusion must
always follow, not always to be avoided
by the additions of senor and junior, oil
: the designations 1st, Cd, &C., which are
common in New England.
An eminent lawyer, who adorned the
Philadelphia bar, 40 or so years ago, hat
a son with the same first name as himself
> who was studying law in his Office. One
: : day letter arrived without any addition
of Junior, but intended for the younger
which the elder gentleman opened ant
> read. 1t was from source not very cred
II = table for any one.
a L am ashamed of you,' said the fathe
;, Indignantly, handing it to his son.
4 am ashamed of you, sir, replied th'
. son, handing itback, with his finger point
>, ed at the direction.
~ One of the sons of the Benjamin Stoke
; ly, of whom we have spoken above. wa
born during his fathers absence from
? home. On his return, his wife told hin
J that she had called the child Benjamin
. after him.
. None of that, cried he, Il have no no
= ton ofhearing people talking of old Be
. Stokely.'
:. This confusion is one objection to tn
n practice which we condemn; another l
that if parent calls child after himself
n he is in danger of becoming partial TO tha
> child, at the expense of the others. Thi
a is feeling which makes its way into tn
a minds of even good men and women;
/. seems to some that child bearing thei
name in full, is more fully their represen
: tative than others. AS this is all wrong
tits best to prevent the arising of such feel
e ings, by giving no occasion for their ez
IS istence.
2. The more common last name Is
# the more uncommon should the first one bC
y We can pardon almost any prefix to Smith
= Brown and Jones. AS one of the learne
l. fathers of the bar lately observed in dis
y couse: who shall declare the generatlo
n ofthe Smiths, and especially OF the job
/ Smiths?' The very mention of John Smit
d in court house, police Office, or publ
= place-and it is of frequent mention there
,e in--brings broad grin into every one
>; face Immediately.
n 8, No name should be given to chill
,e that will suggest ludicrous idea whe
,r the initial only is used We always pitie
l. Mr.. P. Cox, and Mr.. T.. Potts, both worth
r men, but with thoughtless godfathers.
k Middle-aged persons, in Philadelphia
IS can recollect druggist named Ash (no'