Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1898-02-08
STREET NOMENCLATURE.
Mr.. Schuldt Thinks Any Change
Would He Calamity.

Mr.. Schuldt Thinks Any Change
Would BE a Calamity.
To the Editor of The Evening Star:
The Commissioners have recommended,
and their recommendation will no doubt be
considered. an entirely different plan Of
street nomenclature from that contem-
plated by Judge Hagner. Their scheme Is to
have three or four series of names. one for
each section Of the city. whereas the origf-
nal proposition was only for two series,
northern and southern.
The plan now recommended was suggest
ed by MIR. Thomas w. Gilmer, the inter-
esting and voluminous contributor to The
Star. Although generally on the popular
side of a question, Mr.. GIlmers present
plan cannot fail to excite antagonism. AS
/ attempted to demonstrate Iii the Star of
December 30, 1897. the plan Of Justice Hag
ner was most illogical, confusing and COM
plicated. Mr.. Gilmer's scheme, however,
as advocated by the Commissioners, Is
Quadruply SO.
Oh, we gods, what predicament we will
involve ourselves in yet. with this street
nomenclature change. The eminent Amer
lean" fallacy of Justice Hagner is to be
feared, but from four series system,
Lord deliver u.s." Why not alternate?
For instance, Adams street, Buffalo street
Champlain street, Dakota street, etc. Why
not mix them up? Think of the advantage
it would be to our tricky memory? We
would then have a memory system in our
own streets. Think of the education it
would afford our youths. They could Sc
cure a whole days teaching by simply
gasping, open-mouthed, at the numerous
newly lettered lamp posts. Think of the
many other benefits derived from such
system. Dignity, as advocated by Judge
Hagner, would be preserved. The terri
BILE confusion resulting from the letters
b, c, d, E, G, p, V and T, would be oblit-
Grated. The present undesired simplicity
would also be expunged. However if this
plan cannot he pat into operation the Gill
mer scheme is next worse. The Hagnerian
plan is the best, because it has the least
changes, and the least We have the better.
None at all would be perfection. If
change must be made let us have the sim
plest.
1 contend, however. that q change in Cur
present nomenclature is entirely uDneces-
sary. Ii we have outgrown orr A Cs
why not eliminate cur ! IS. The TWO go
hand in hand and are insepdraule. Admit
ted that there are q few defects, such as
must necessarily exist in every great city
the remedy lies in remaining thcs., few ir-
Irregularities, and not those OF the entire
city. AS has SO truly been said: Con
venience and simplicity are far more i'm
portant than historical and sentimental
considerations" If this be true, as it is
then we now have the best system that
could ever be devised, and any tinkering
would be folly.
The fundamental principle of street no.
menclature should be its simplicity. Wash
ir gton Is blessed In this regard. Its sys-
tenn Is 50 iosiSai, VI sihiPie' tiiat stranger
can. in ten minutes, comprehend the entire
plan. But how different this woEld be I'M
der either of the contemplated changes!
Chaos would reign supreme. Our pres ,nt
tranquility regarding street simplicity
would be dashed TO atoms, and confusion
would usurp its place. Complications
would be elected. and contentment, the
present incumbent, will be defeated Al
though having spoken to many, have as
yet not met a single citizen who is N favor
of SO radical change in our street nomen-
c.aturs.
They have enjoyed the happy privilege of