1SS7.] 'J'-'^ [Taylor. 



Beautiful and simple as this system appears, and clear as its nomencla- 

 ture is to those familiar with the Greek and Latin tongues, it is j-et open 

 to animadversion on practical grounds, in that its language is that of the 

 philosoplier, and not of the tradesman or the business man. To all but 

 classical scholars — that is, to the large majority of men — the terms used in 

 the French tables are difficult and unmeaning ; to be acquired and appre- 

 ciated only by a laborious effort of abstract memory, and even when thus 

 acquired, constantly liable to be confounded and mistaken. Its metres 

 and litres, its myriametres and myrialitres, its decigrammes and decagram- 

 mes, are admirably contrived to bewilder the uninitiated, but of all possi- 

 ble devices are the least adapted to the common uses of daily life. To 

 obtain a ready and direct apprehension of the valuesof different denomina- 

 tions of measure, it is necessar}' that each should be recognized as an in- 

 dependent unit, without reference to its fractional or multiple derivation. 

 Thus, "ounces" or "inches" are at once seized upon by the mind as dis- 

 tinctive standards of value ; and the fact that these terms both signify 

 "twelfths" (.being derived from the Latin "uncia") never enters into our 

 contemplation when using them. The coin a "cent" has come to signify 

 a "one" and not a "hundredth." "What is really needed then for the 

 popular service, is a set of names, brief, easj^ and distinctive by a wide 

 separation of sound, however arbitrary or unmeaning may be their origin. 

 In this view of the matter, the rude and indefinite vulgarisms of "grains" 

 and "scruples," "feet" and "rods," "gills" and "gallons" are in- 

 finitely preferable to the scientific jargon of centigrammes and milUrjram- 

 mes, and hectogrammes and kilogrammes. In fact, the French system has 

 totally ignored all units, excepting the single one selected as the standard 

 for each table. Thus in weight, the P*rench cannot be said to have any 

 other measure than the gramme ; and instead of resorting to the dead 

 languages for so familiar a thing as a simple numeration table, it would be 

 much better to speak of and write down, the multiples or divisions of this 

 weight as a thousand or a hundred grammes, or as so many hundredths 

 or thousandths of a gramme. This, in plain English (or plain French), 

 would be understood by every one, and would just as conveniently ex- 

 press everything that is contained in the high-sounding terms we have 

 characterized as "scientific jargon."* 



An almost unmanageable difficulty in the introduction of the French 



* While lluiti strongly e.xpressinf? our objection to the nomcndalarc of the French tables 

 (whose very fault is its excess of system), it would be unjust not to acknowledge, and 

 ungenerous not to admire, the catholic sentiment which dictated it. The eminent 

 philosophers to whom belongs the honor of developing a metrology by far the most per- 

 fect that has yet been devised, felt as if they were legislating for the civilized world. 

 Desirous that all might have the benefit of their labors, they rejected all the familiar 

 terms emi)loyed in France, and naturally re.-orted to the great storehouse from wliich 

 the scientilic world has ever lieeti accustomed to ilraw its technical phraseology ; exhibit- 

 ing in this, their anxiety to adopt a language which might be acceiitable to all nations. 

 Unfortunately it is suited to none. The language of science cannot be that of the shop 

 and the market-place. 



