THE TASMAN SEA.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18168, 14 August 1922, Page 7

THE TASMAN SEA.

HOW THE NAME WAS GIVEN. PRECEDENTS FOR ALTERATION. A. and N.Z.. SYDNEY, Aug. 12. Mr. E. Andrews, secretary of the Australasian Association for the Advancement of Science, supplies an extract from the minutes of the third session of the association held at Christohurch. in 1890 to the effect that the Lords of the Admiralty be requested to adopt the name of Tasman for the sea between Australia and New Zealand by entering it on their charts. The Admiralty accepted the proposition.

Sir Edgeworth David, who favours the substitution of the name Anzac Sea, said he thought the change could be effected by agreement between the Commonwealth and the Dominion, with the concurrence of the British Admiralty. He pointed out that there were plenty of precedents for change of place names. New Holland was changed to Australia, Mount Kosciusko and Mount Townsend had been transposed, and during recent years St. Petersburg had been changed to Petrograd. HISTORY OF PRESENT NAME REASONS AGAINST CHANGE. MR. JUSTICE CHAPMAN'S VIEWMr. Justice Chapman writes:—" it seems to me that it is a matter for congratulation that the Australian Prime Minister has discouraged any attempt to exchange the name of the Tasman Sea for Anzac Sea. The existing name has a meaning; the proposed new name is really meaningless ae applied to this particular sheet of water The former rests oil an historical basis; the latter does not. The proper locality in which to perpetuate the great, name of Tasman is the great sea which he discovered; there are other more appropriate ways of perpetuating the glorious deeds of oiw soldiers at Anzac Cove. " The actual history of the uarae Tasman Sea has never been fully written. I am, however, in a position to give it. Many years ago Sir James Hector, Government geologist, one of our most distinguished men of science, called my attention to the fact that the great sea between New Zealand and Australia had no separate name. " Some years later, when preparations were making for the meeting at Christchurch in 1890 of the Australasian Association for the Advancement ol Science, I was appointed vice-president of the geographical section. In anticipation of the meeting I sent in to the secretary a notice of motion to the effect that the name Tasman Sea should be given to the great stretch of ocean in question and that the Lords of the Admiralty be requested to give effect to this suggestion. 1 did not happen to be at the meeting at which the proposal was moved, as I had other duties at other sections; but soon afterwards Mr. S. Percy Smith— then, I think, Surveyor-General of New Zealand—informed me that the resolution I had proposed was adopted- " Later Mr. Smith informed me that the New Zealand Survey Office had* mapped the limits of the Tasman Sea in such a way as to avoid confusion, and that with this delimitation the. proposal had gone forward to the LoHs of the Admiralty. In duo course word came that the suggestion had been' " This means that on the recommendation of a scientific body that represents both Australia and Now Zealand the name has been entered on the Admiralty charts by what must be considered to be Imperial authority. It means a great) deal more than that. The other nations follow our Admiralty in the construction of international oceanic charts, and all over the world mapmakers and publishers of maps have adopted this name as surely as they have adopted the names of othei international seas, such as Behring Sea, Davis Strait, Bass Strait, and Cook s Strait. All these names represent, as Tasman Sea represents, the name of a discoverer. Such names originating with soma particular nation are no long©r tho property of any nation to bo changed at will as a nation may change tile name of its territory. The limit of the authority of the Admiralty was to put forward a name for »n area that had no name. A suggestion even of that great body to change the name ol an area of the ocean would not be entitled to international recognition. If in a moment of patriotic enthusiasm we were lo attempt to make the change, even with the approval of the Lords -of- tho Admiralty. .we could not fore© it on other nations"lt seems to me further that the name Anzao is quite inappropriate. The matter is an international one. There is no ' reason, for instance, why the French should recognise a name which does not recognise their services at the Dardanelles ; there is no reason why Americans should recognise the right of the British to rename that sea any more than if they claimed to rename the Carribean Sea. I have in my possession a school atlas published in Cairo. Do those ,cho support this proposal expect independent Egypt to recognise this change? All nations—even enemy nations—have enual rights in a question of this kind " Both Australia and New Zealand owe much to the Dutch. In a large measure we owe the discovery of our respective countries to that great-hearted nationSurely the name of Tasman Sea, deliberately given on the recommendation of theso young nations, is a fitting monument for the British nation to hare in this way erected to one of the £roat«st seamen of our ancient ally, and surely it would be an exhibition of something worse than bad taste now to attempt to pull it down."