METRIC REFORM. 89 



The principle on which names should be given is sufficiently clear. 

 The names should simply answer the natural questions : " How long is 

 it ? How big square ? How heavy ? " etc. 



To illustrate by long measure the base-unit is now called the 

 metre " How long is that ?" is the first question. Apace, a long step, 

 a stride, would answer the question ; probably, in England and America, 

 despite all objections, a new yard, or a long yard, is the best name. 

 The new would be dropped in due time (as in new style and old style), 

 and the name becomes simply yard. 



To proceed with the table. Each and every unit in each table 

 should have its own strong, independent name, instead of a name re- 

 ferring to the base-unit, so called. The actual relation between the 

 units is important ; but to express this in the name is worse than su- 

 perfluous, it is a mere incumbrance. There is no danger of forgetting 

 the decimal scale. 



The metric tables provide names for 



ToVo> to to, !> 10 > 100, 1,000, 10,000 metres. 



Some of these we would omit, and perhaps provide others not given, 

 beginning with the 10 ooo part, for microscopic uses. 



What should the name be ? It should suggest the length intended, 

 say, a hair's-breadth, or a leaf's-thickness ; soon, by shedding, a hair 

 or leaf. 



The name of the 1 \ - - part ? Still suggestion say, a pin's-breadth 

 (soon, a pin), a straw's-breadth, a narrow braid, a coin's-thickness, or a 

 card's or knife-blade's. The words " breadth " or " thickness " would 

 serve the purpose of explanation at first, and then shed, leaving only 

 pin, straw, braid, knife-blade, card, etc. 



Some such name would serve not, millimetre in Latin and Greek ; 

 not, even metre-thousandth in Greek and English ; not, any name ex- 

 pressing a numerical relation to some other unit. If any numerical 

 relation at all, not to a unit at 1,000 removes. Finally, not a fractional 

 relation, if any, but one expressed by a whole number. All these nega- 

 tive limitations are full of matter. 



The next name the jfa part might be nail's-breadth, nail. 



The next, now decimetre, hand. 



Then, the new yard, or long yard, finally to become 3'ard. 



The fifth unit, 10 metres, half-chain. Really no name needed. 



100 metres = stone's-throw ; bow-shot = throw, cast, shot. 



1,000 metres = a short mile, new mile. An accidental association 

 would make the word Jcile serve. The learned would know the Greek 

 derivation ; the unlearned would remember it by the rhyme. Numerous 

 illustrations occur, equally casual. The objection is not to Greek, but 

 to the want of some familiar association, no matter how trifling. 



10,000 metres = a great league, or double league. 



Observe that each unit thus named is as much a base-unit as any 

 other. 



