t64 On Standards of Weight and Meafwe, 



fcrve that by adding only 44.35 1 1 parts out of loooo; or about j-^'-th part, to the cori' 

 tent of our prefent Winchejler meafi(re, that it would then contahi exaflly lO cubic feet. 

 Thefe tranfitions froni the prefent t» fuch an improved fyflem, would be " a confutn- 

 " mation devoutly to be wiflied," and moft ardently do I wifti it to be legalized. 



A ftandard meafure for the purpofcs of trade, in particular, as well as for others, that 

 would uniformly give an accurate refult, and could be eafily made, examined and afcertained, 

 by common mechanics, which neither our prefent liquid or dry meafures evidently can, 

 would furely be an acquifition of great value. Such an one, I humbly prcfume, would be 

 the following : — A fquare pyramid, whofe perpendicular height is exadlly thiice the 

 length of the fide of the bafe : for fuch an one, and every feftion of it, made by a plane 

 parallel to its bafe, would, in the firft inftancc poflefs, and in every fubdivifion, retain 

 thefe remarkable properties*. 



I ft. Similar comparative dimehfions to thofe above given, for the original pyramid, 

 i. e. every fmaller pyramid, formed by the above-mentioned parallel fecSion, would have 

 its perpendicular height thrice the length of the fide of its bafe, and 



zdly. The length of the fide of each bafe will always indicate, or equal the cube root of 

 the folid content of the pyramid e. g. If the length of the fide of the bafe be 3. the folid 

 content will be the cube of 3. viz. 3x3x3 = 27. 



Mr. Locke has fomewhere in his writings ftated it as wrong for one man to pull down 

 the fuperftrufture of another without building or erefting a better in its ftead. I fome 

 time paft took the liberty to point out to you an error in the comparative tables of Englifh 

 and French meafures in your Journal ; and upon Mr. Locke's principle I feel it juft to give 

 you my calculation of the general heads of comparative tables between fuch a fyftem as is 

 idvanccd in the former part of this paper, and that I 'apprehend to be now eftablifhed in 

 France, premifing, that I take the length of the metre from your Journal, vol. IIL page 



pieds. pou. lignes. 



283, at 3 o 11.296, and I take the comparative length of the Englilh, with 



the French foot, from data in the ConnoilTatice des Temps for 1795, and from the Philo- 

 fophical Tranfaflions for 1768, page ^26. 



By thefe references it will appear that the French foot is to the Englilh 



as i. : 1.065752004, &c. 

 Confequently, 



French foot. Englifti decades, or loths of an Englifli foot. 



^ I. rz 10.65752004 



• 1 have been many years in the habit of ufing a pyramid meafure to examine corn ) and am peifcflly 

 ecnvinced that fuch a one wil\ indicate a far more accurate refult than can arife from the manner in whicl> 

 torn it meafur«d by the bulhel. — G, 



3 Comparat'tvi 



