Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1856-06-18

mans name in the United States, or Patience,
8 Prudence, Charity, women's names IN England,
though now chiefly confined to the lower classes.
The ancient could not have distinguished one
lanother with 10 small supply of names, that is,
! Of first names, as we have; but when the
4 Roman system of double or triple names was in
troduced, the first or calling names became rapid
ly lessnrpnerous; SD that now in almost every
family, you find Charles a George, Richard
Ia William, or q Robert; Mary, Elizabeth, Anne,
\ Julia, OF Chmlotte,ana a few more The number
is very small. In many families there are two
or three OF each, sometimes four, grandma,
mother, and daughter, all of the same name, as
if there was dearth of words to extingnish
them. But the noderns are fond of namesakes,
and all are conservatives in respect to names,
and jealons of the introduction of new ones into
the family line. Even when John the Baptist
was named, bis kindred wondered at the name,
because no one of his kindred was known by that
name The practice is therefore very old. tho
we find no traces of it in patriarchial times;
and it has become more and moro o fixed and
popular practice by the lapse Of time ss 3
In either choosing or inyenfing. special care
should be had to the mnsic of the Christian and
surname; ifpossible, the first should never end
With the same letter with which the other be-
gins. Thus for instance, Peter Robinson would
just be called Peter Hobson in England, and the
two names would be confounded,4 and Robert
Taylor is just the same as Robber Taylor; not
that these two will ever be confounded, but q
name is clearer and purer when it is well re-
leved, and when it does not blend its component
parts into pun or an eqivoque. Certain letters
blend more sweetly than Others, therefore both
names should be tried together This, we be-
liava ia vary roro " 1ona Tho hris
alone is considered Henry or William, or Julia
Or Chariotte-withont any reference to what
follows, and then we have William Manning or
Charlotte Ray, !. &. Charlotte Tray, or some
other unmusical combination which might easi-
ly have been avoided.i Robert Manning is good
but William Manning is not The first is well
relieved, but the other is confused. The ear of
every person is able ut once to perceive the su-
periority of one to the other, but people don't
think of it. Simple rs the rule is, it seems to be
almost universally unknown. and we often per-
ceive the want of this little bit of knowledge in
the lines of poets and poetesses who send their
first and second attempts to us, and who mark
the beauty of their language by such an gnmllsi-
cal combination of letters which never can read
sweetly.9 E- siaf 9Hi ests .nHoi;- sa-iifisi'.
: Not long ago we read of gentleman yclept
Sas Stokes, Esq; what Kissing OF esses 1t
would require o serpent almost to pronounce
such a name, and the title of Esq does not inn
prove it. Surely that mans parents either had
no musical ear or. they never thought of the
Stokes at all when they determinedto give him
the name of Silas. 1t was the worst name they
could have chosen worse than Charles. Robert
or William, or any name without an would
have been preferable; but perhaps for the sake
of some old uncle, and an expected inheritance,
the child was Kissed into the church and the
State by baptism and registration. Such man
as Mark Stark is very different from Silas's;
but still it is eccentric, and somewhat ridiculous
from the rhyme of it. 1t is impossible to pass
by such name without notice. Moreover, It
is eesily remembered. There may be some ad-
vantage in having such distinction. 1t helps
one to Immortality. John Stark We should nev-
er have remembered nor do we remember Mark
personally, though we have seen him often.-
We. only remember his name, it is difficult to
forget such a name, for one is ept to speak of it
and fix it in the memory. s;,..-
When one is born to monosylabic name, it
is better to give two or more syables to the
Christian name for euphony. IfSir Christopher
Wren had been merely Ben Wren, he would not
have seemed so dignifed parsonage. Even
wig could not have magnified such q tom-tit
pair of monosylables into greatness Augustus
Adophus, coupled with Wren, makes respect
able pair; but Ben and Wren are like two little
spouses toddling along and almost walking be-
tween peoples legs. Kit Wren was no doubt
his schoolboy name and Benjamin Wren would
have done as well as Christopher, but we mere
ly suppose that Ben was the total when we re-
gard its insignifcance. There is grandeur in
size, and it is always well to have long name
for State occasions, like long-tailed coat in
stead of jacket when invited to dress party.
What Nebuchadnezars pet name was when his
mother nursed him is difficult to discover amid
the ruins OF Babylon; Neb most probably. but
such name for great monarch, the founder Of
civilization, would have been ridiculous. But
Mahar-shalial- l-hash-bazz would make no man
great even though clothed in purple. Why, we
cannot say, except that the hash is ridiculous in
English ears, but it may be dignified syllable
in the ears of an Oriental. German, Polish, and
Russian names are to US undignifed,and Chinese
Yings, Yongs, HOngs, and Kongs are all ridicu-
lous. No doubt our own are so to them, and
they would laugh heartily if they were told that
one of our greatest philosophers were Lord
Hogsfesh, or Lord Pork or Lord Bacon; it
matters not which when translated into Chinese.
We get familiarized with awful names, to
which nothing but long use and wont could re-
concile us, and why should not other nations do
the same2 But there are generally few which
get stigmatized amongst ourselves for some un-
accountable reason. Hogg and Hoare are moro
respectable in England than Snooks, but why
they should be SO is not easily explained; nor is
it easy to say why Humphrey has never taken
in England, except that Hum and Humph are
component parts of it. But Geoffrey's compo-
nent parts are good enough, and it has been de-
secrated into old Jeffrey. Grizzell is reasonably
rejected, and Tabitha reminds one too strongly
of cat but there are numerous pretty names
which have not been brought into modern Use
at all, and which have not been yulgariscd and
it is surprising how very few we are content to
do with, rs if we were afraid Of burdening our
memories with too long list. We seem to relish
the prestige of names, and prefer those which
have been long domesticated, and which have
already found their pet abbreviations familiar
lied as household words in all family circles
1t is also We believe in other countries. There
are few favorite calling names which prevail
even in Eastern lands, and the distinctions are
perceived in the family names of the Western
world, (which are numerous. and in the addition
of the fathers name in the East. This no doubt
arises from personal prepossessions, and new
names can scarcely be expected. except from
those who have no kindred and no affections,
no grateful recollections, and no patriotic en-
thusiasm. Such we hope are very small num-
Der.
CONCENTRATED LABoR.-The great evil of A.
nierican agriculture consists in desire to spread
in other words-farmers act as though thew
wenld be known by the number of acres in nos.
session, rather than by the care and labor given
1t is of Importance that no more land should be-
owned than can be we'll cultivated: that labor
should be concentrated where 1t will most read
lily yield ample. returns for the time, toll and
capital invested, yet monied farmers will skin