THE METRIC SYSTEM. 191 



cask, we have the fourth of a gallon or quart, and, heyond that, we have 

 for wine and beer, the quarter of a quart, or half-pint. Even that does not 

 end the quartering of measures, for at the bar of a tavern quarterns of gin, 

 that is quarter-pints of gin, are sold. Evidently we must have quarters. 

 What do you do about them ? Ten will not divide by four. 



The Americans have quarter dollars. 



And are inconsistent in having them. Just as in France, notwithstand- 

 ing the metric system, they speak of a quarter of a litre and a quarter of a 

 livre, so in the United States they divide the dollars into quarters, and in 

 so doing depart from the professed mode of division in the very act of 

 adopting it — depart in a double way. For the tenths of a dollar play but 

 an inconspicuous part. They do not quote prices in dollars and dimes. I 

 continually see books advertised at 25c., 75c., $1.25c., $1.75c., and so forth, 

 but I do not see any advertised as $1.3 dimes or 4 dimes, etc. So that, while 

 not practically using the division theoretically appointed, they use the 

 division theoretically ignored. 



It may be somewhat inconsistent, but there is no practical incon- 

 venience. 



I beg your pardon. If they had a 12-division of the dollar, instead of a 

 10-division, these prices $1.25 and $1.75 would be $1..3 and $1..9. And not 

 only would there be a saving in speech, writing, and printing, but there 

 would be a saving in calculation. Only one column of -figures would need 

 adding up where now there are two to add up; and, besides decreased time 

 and trouble, there would be fewer mistakes. But leaving this case of the 

 dollar, let us pass to other cases. Are we in all weights, all measures of 

 length, all areas and volumes, to have no quarters ? 



Quarters can always be marked as '25. 



So that in our trading transactions of every kind we are to make this 

 familiar quantity — a quarter, by taking two-tenths and flve-hundredths ? 

 But now let me ask a further question — What about thirds ? In our daily 

 life division by three often occurs. Not uncommonly there are three per- 

 sons to whom equal shares of pi'operty have to be given. Then in talk 

 about wills of intestates one hears of widows' thirds ; and in. Acts of Par- 

 liament the two-thirds majority often figures. Occasionally a buyer will 

 say — "A half is more than I want and a quarter is not enough; I will 

 take a third." Frequently, too, in medicines where half a grain is too 

 much or not enough, one-third of a grain or two-thirds of a grain is or- 

 dered. Continually thirds are wanted. How do you arrange ? Three 

 threes do not make ten. 



We can not make a complete third. 



You mean we must use a makeshift third, as a makeshift quarter is to 

 be used ? 



No ; unfortunately that can not be done. We signify a thu-d by 'SSBS, 

 etc. 



That is to say, you make a third by taking 3 tenths, plus 3 hundredths, 

 plus 3 thousandths, plus 3 ten-thousandths, and so on to infinity ! 



Doubtless the method is unsatisfactory, but we can do no better. 



Nevertheless, you really think it desirable to adopt luiiversally for meas- 

 urements of weight, length, area, capacity, value, a system which gives us 

 only a makeshift quarter and no exact third. 



These inconveniences are merely set-offs against the great conveniences. 



