The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1892-10-28
NAMES OF WARSHIPS.
Novel Nomenclature in the
United States.
SOLVING A HARD PROBLEM.
The System by Which Vessels Are Now Dss-
ignated-A Rule That Does Net
Always Work.
New York Sun.

ne SELECTION Oh the name OF olympia,
town in the State Of Washington, for chris
tening the $500 ton protected cruiser about
to be laun ched at San Francisco. and the re-
ported selection of the name Brooklyn for
the new armor cruiser whose construction
is soon TO begin, again brings up the subject
of our naval nomenclature.
1t is natural to desire some name from the
Pacific States for the new cruiser built on
that coast, although the Charleston is also
San Francisco built vessel; while, If the
armored cruiser New York is called after
the city Instead of the State. the name
Brooklyn has certain propriety as applied
TO vessel of the same type. and in part
authorized as sister ship TO the New York,
although really to be considerably larger.
Both selections, however, suggest the old
problem as to the true system of naming
our new vessels. One great improvement
made by an executive order of Secretary
Tracy was that OF simplifying the ratings.
Under the former rule the lronclads were
rat ed according to tonnage measurement,
and the other steam war vessels according
to tonnage displacement. The result was
that we had the San Francisco, OF 1888 tons
displacement. rated as frst-rate. and the
Texas, of $500, as Second-ratc; the Phila-
delphia, of 4324 tons displacement, as
frst-rate and the Maine, OF 664S, as
second-rate. The Dolphin, of 1900 tons, was
a thrd-rate, aud so was the MiantO nom oh,
Of 1890 tons displacement. But perhaps the
greatest disparity in the two systems of
reckoning was furnished by finding the
little Yantic. of 900 tons displacement and
the double-turret monitor Puritan, Of 5000,
both put down rs thir0-retes
Tie explanation in all these cases was
found In the statutes, which declared that
first rates were to consists of steam vessels
q patl Ia bor e MI ma Mt nd
irOnelads of not less than 5000 tons measure
ments; that second rates were to consist
Of all steamers OF from 1000 TO 1000 tons
measurement; that third rates should con-
siSt OF all steam vessels OF from 900 TO 1000
tons measurement. Now the Puritan had
a tonnage measurement less than one-third
as great as her displacement being, In fact,
only 1870. so that under these rules she was
only third rater. Secretary Tracy. in
accordance with opinions indicated in
Congress, made an order classifying all
vessels not less than 5000 tons displacement
as first rates. all Of 5000 but less than 5000
as second rates, all of 1000 but less than
5000 as third rates, all Of less than 1000 as
fourth rates. This rule has destroyed the
old double standard, and puts all vessels on
the common footing of tonnage displace-
ment
But that left the question OF names still
undetermined. The statutes provided that
first rates should be named after the States,
and so on. The House, when the question
came up before ii, was for maintaining this
old system, with q few notifications. That
Is, first rates, whether armored or unarm-
ored, should be named after the States
second rates after the cities, third rates
after important events or names in our na-
val history, fourth rates after lakes and
rivers. But the Senate voted to discoRnect
the naming with the rating, and to name
battle-ships after the States, cruisers after
cities, coast defense vessels, If unarmOred,
after rivers, and If armOIed after important
events or names In our history, and special
classes after their special service.
The latter OF these plans is of course the
one which has been followed In banning the
5J00-ton protected cruiser, fist rate, after
the city OF Olympia. In the case Of the New
York, an armOred cruiser Of $50 tons. the
matter may have been left a little doubt
ful, because the State aud the city had the
same name. But a clearer indication had
been furnished by the Columbia, which was
a first rater OF 1850 tons, and was named
from tie capital of South Carolina. Even
then, some persons had kept in mind the
fact that the District of Cclumb ia bore the
same name, and that the launch of the ves-
sci occurred in The Columbus anniversary
year. But the naming OF the Olympia. for
which, before the new rule was settled, the
name California had been suggested, shows
eonclusiyely that the plan of naming all
first Taters from States of the Union has
more striking application Of the new rule in
calling the new armOred cruiser. which will
probably exceed 5000 tons, the Brooklyn,
instead Of after the name OF some State.
There are arguments both for and against
the new system of naming. The considera-
ton in its favor is that the type rather than
the size Of a vessel should be indicated by its
name. On the other hand the House Com
mittee, In rejecting that D an. held that types
are too varied to enable the average citizen
TO get an Idea of the capacity of vessel
from this rule, whereas at least with naming
according to rates he would know what ton
mage she exceeded. As the House Committee
put 1t, "the designation of a vessel as a
battle-Ship might easily embrace armored
coast defense vessels, while nnder the de-
signation Of cruiser we should have ac-
cording to the latest official classification.
vessels ranging in size and power all the
way from the 500 tons armOred cruiser to the
cruisers Nos. Il and 13, of only 1850 tons
displacement.
The subject is not wholly easy TO manage
In way TO secure a perfect method and
harmony. We have now, for example, an
armored cruiser. the Maine, named after q
mored cruiser, in distinction from the
Texas. battle ship. Yet we find the two
most recent armored cruisers named for
cities; and we also find the names OF cities
applied 10 craft so widely different in type
as an unarmOred vessel Of 1000 tons and ar
mored vessels of $3.50 and 5000 tens.
There are only few of our warships now
lacking names. One of them is Cruiser No.
IL. the mate to the Columbia; another, the
newest battle ship. for which the contract is
not vet given out; third, the ram building
al Bath. perhaps TO be called the Ammen;
finally, torpedo boat No. 2.