British Inch as the Unit of Measure of the Mound Buihiers. 5 5 



measured by various parties with the same resuUs, Moreover, it was 

 proved that the stone was approximately the symmetrical half of an 

 ellipse, because by mapping it on paper, and then reversing it on 

 its straight edge, the whole ellipse became produced. As to the 

 " Gest Tablet" see Appendix C. 



Even if the contriver of this stone had no idea of the particular 

 unit of measure by which it would as to its straight edge measure 9 

 (nine) of these particular units, viz : British inches, and its circum- 

 ference 12 (twelve) thereof, especially when the power and con- 

 venience of these numbers for particular architectural purposes is 

 considered, it would seem impossible that he could have chanced 

 on it. The fact that this unit of measure so fits in this exceedingly 

 curious mode of making, showing and preserving a standard of 

 measure is proof of the general intention of the contriver. Couple 

 this fact with another, viz., that the mound in which it was found 

 was an elliptical one "about 440 feet in circumference" a peculiar 

 division of 5280 feet, (for *f|"=44o) used much in Mound struc- 

 ture. Still further connect with these the further facts which we 

 will show, viz.: that the use ofthis measure in the structure of the 

 Mound Builder works, is confirmed in a great number of instances, 

 nay universally; and that too, by an interchangeable play upon 

 the numbers of the measures, as 12 and 21, 24 and 42, etc. Such 

 being the condition of facts, and such is the condition of facts, 

 one must seemingly come'to the conclusion that the British inch 

 and foot were used then just as one would have to now to recog- 

 nize the measures and scale adopted in the construction of a multi- 

 tude of rooms, passages, openings, etc., in any large and carefully 

 constructed building of to-day. 



This stone was found and placed in the museum before many 

 of the surveys of Squier and Davis were madeand before any of 

 them were given to the public. They probably never heard of, cer- 

 tainly they have never mentioned the stone. Its appearance is not 

 calculated to draw attention, and so far as we can discover has never 

 been commented on by any one save Mr. Moore. Beyond the 

 facts, that its shape was peculiar, that it was worked, and that it 

 was found in the mound, there was nothing about it to attract more 

 than a passing glance. It was deposited by M. Gridley in the 

 museum at the request of Mr. Carley with some fragments of other 

 pieces of stone found by Mr. Gridley, at the same time and place, 

 and these are now in the collection of the Natural History Society, 

 bearing the original labels. 



