o a visitor in the garden, with the
words, "Do see how wonderful this onion is!" such a prejudice would be
set up as fatally to impair its fragrance. There is, in fact, much
in a name; and therefore the attempt of a correspondent of _The Daily
Express_ to find a generic nomenclature for domestic servants should
be given very serious attention; the purpose being to meet "the
objection felt by so many women servants to being either called by
Christian or surname."

As a means of placating this very sensitive class the correspondent
writes:--

"One nearly always calls a cook by the name of her calling. I
therefore suggest that a name be adopted beginning with the first
letter of the class. For example:--

Lady's-maid Louise.
Parlourmaid Palmer.
Housemaid Hannah.
General Gertrude.
Scullerymaid Sarah."

Here we have materials for a sweeping innovation which might, if it
spread, not only simplify life but reinforce the language. For why
confine such terms to domestic servants? If all parlourmaids are to be
called "Palmer," why not, for example, call all editors "Eddy" (very
good Eddy, or very bad Eddy, according to taste)? And all London
County Councillors, "Elsie"?

But let us look a little narrowly at the specimens given. "Palmer"
for "parlourmaid" is good; but "Louise" does not reproduce the sound
values of "lady's-maid." Some such word as "Lais" would be better, or
why not "Lady-bird," which combines the desired similarity with the
new euphemism "home-bird," invented to help transform domestic service
to a privilege and pleasure? "Hannah" for "housemaid" is also wrong,
although for "handmaid" it would be good. On the analogy of "Palmer,"
why not call all housemaids "How"? or even "House"?

If American Colonels can be called HOUSE, why not English housemaids?
For generals "Jenny" would be better than "Gertrude"; and for
scullery-maids "Scully." "Scully" is quite a good name; there is a
distinguished psychologist named SULLY, and there was an M.P. for
Pontefract named GULLY. No scullery-maid need be offended.

It is odd how we call some persons by their profession or calling, and
others not. We say "Doctor," but we do not address our gum-architect
as "Dentist." We say "Carpenter," but we do not address a plumber as
"Plumber." (Incidentally, all plumbers might be called Warner). We
say "Gardener" and "Coachman," but we do not address an advocate as
"Barrister." If