THE METRIC SYSTEM. 729 



and consider the memory and labor demanded to convert the 

 former to eagles, cents, or mills, or the latter to pounds, shillings, 

 pence, or farthings. Our eagles, half eagles, quarter eagles, half 

 dollars, quarters, dimes, five-cent, three-cent, two-cent, and one- 

 cent pieces come and go as public convenience demands, and they 

 do not give us the slightest inconvenience in calculation or ac- 

 count ; for their units are decimally related to each other and 

 they are invariably mentally referred to the one money unit, the 

 dollar. 



Among the several irrelevant and long-exploded arguments 

 urged by Mr. Spencer, none is " more so " than his Socratic at- 

 tempt to " array Nature " against the metric system, and it might 

 well be passed over on account of its suicidal character. It may 

 be worth while to remark, however, that the use of the decimal 

 system in dividing the arc of a circle is not in the slightest degree 

 " against Nature," that it is even now being strongly advocated 

 by many eminent European geodesists and astronomers, and that 

 it would be a very decided advance, if brought about, as, in the 

 opinion of many, it some time will be. But it has nothing what- 

 ever to do with the metric system of weights and measures. Also, 

 that whenever the English Parliament or the American Congress 

 shall have under consideration an act providing that the year 

 shall consist of ten months, the week of ten days, etc., it is likely 

 that Mr. Spencer will have little difficulty in finding people ready 

 to discuss the merits of such a measure. But these things have 

 no place in the metrological reform under consideration, and their 

 being brought into the discussion occasions no little surprise 

 among those who are accustomed to expect from so eminent a 

 scientific man as Mr. Spencer something like a fair and logical 

 presentation of at least one side of a question. 



There appears, however, one inference in reference to the 

 division of a compass dial that is worthy of attention; it is 

 that so inherent is the habit of halving and rehalving that the 

 thirty-two-point division is fixed beyond all hope of change. On 

 the contrary, the practice of ignoring this division is constantly 

 growing, and to such an extent that now a large number of sail- 

 ing charts and many compasses show circles divided into degrees 

 instead, and many a man at the wheel has told me that he prefers 

 to have the course laid in that way. 



But the most astonishing part of Mr. Spencer's argument is 

 yet to come. As he proceeds with his entertaining but somewhat 

 one-sided dialogue, hints of something mysterious begin to appear. 

 The objections to universal decimalization (which nobody has 

 proposed) are put in evidence one by one until the man on the 

 wrong side is led to exclaim in dismay : " You astonish me ! What 

 else is possible ? " In answer he is asked to join in the contem- 



VOL. XLIX. — 57 



