INCHING TOWARD THE METRIC SYSTEM, 1959-79 437 



acr. After he was confirmed by the Senate with the other Metric 

 Board nominees, Hannigan continued as an outspoken advocate of the 

 carefully slowed down approach to metric conversion on which he had 

 insisted during the consideration of the 1975 act. Hannigan, as a Board 

 member, proved to be an articulate and outspoken exponent of the 

 point of view that the Board was a passive referee. To achieve a con- 

 sensus, the Board sometimes deferred to his views. 



During 1977 and 1978, the committee held no formal hearings 

 and made no reports on the metric system. Throughout the entire 

 period, it almost seemed as though progress was at the rate of one 

 millimeter forward and one meter backward. 



A ROSE BY ANY OTHER NAME 



The "giant" forward step w r as taken in May and June 1977. A 

 tempest in a teapot arose w-hen Robert A. Hopkins, editor and pub- 

 lisher of the American Metric Journal, visited Teague in his office and 

 complained that there was great confusion in the spelling of metric 

 terms. Two warring camps had built up thick battle files to prove 

 their respective contentions that "metre" and "litre" merited preser- 

 vation as the pristine pure version, as against the debased, American- 

 ized spelling of "meter" and "liter." Hopkins subsequently wrote 

 Teague : 



It is costing Americans too much to switch spellings to please a select few who 

 complain that these are foriegn (sic) spellings and since the metric system is borrowed 

 from France anyway why use a "foriegn" (sic) spelling for two of the most important 

 words. 



Seizing the bull squarely by the horns, Teague picked up the tele- 

 phone and called Dr. Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary of Com- 

 merce for Science and Technology. He then wrote Hopkins: 



Dr. Baruch has agreed to look into the question of the spelling of the metric 

 units and advise me of the view of the Department. 



There may have been little or no action on getting the President 

 to nominate members of the Metric Board, but by gum they really got 

 cracking when it came to resolving the burning issue of how to spell 

 those words metre, litre, meter, or liter. Acting at breakneck speed, 

 it took Secretary Baruch only 32 days before he responded in an 

 authoritative fashion in a letter to Teague dated May 31, 1977. The 

 letter started out with the tentative observation that "this subject 

 has received far more attention than it is worth." He then gave it all 

 away by confessing how he personally leaned on the issue: 



My feelings on the matter can best be expressed as follows: 

 We allow "metre" 

 But "meter" is netre. 



