94 REPORT—1857. 
and coins, and which especially insists on the great advantage and conve- 
nience of the Metrical System. As Mr. Moorsom also alludes, in encoura- 
ging language, to the sentiments “ of our active-minded Transatlantic rivals,” 
I will add, that not a few of the most distinguished among them have urged 
upon their government an examination of the merits of the same system*. 
Moreover, Mr. Allan Gilmour points out the necessity “of having a law, 
under which the tonnage of all vessels entering our ports, whether British or 
foreign, shall be computed in the same way +.” 
In pursuance of these “cosmopolitan views ” of Mr. Moorsom and Mr. 
Gilmour, I wish to offer some considerations in favour of the adoption of the 
metrical ton in place of the British ton, for the registration of the weight ton- 
nage of ships. It is probable that this mode of registration, if adopted by Great 
Britain, would lead in a short time to perfect uniformity throughout the world. 
The metrical ton of 1000 kilogrammes is now recognised, and in part practi- 
cally adopted by a considerable number of the principal mercantile nations. It 
is established in France, Belgium, Holland, Prussia, Hamburg and the other 
Hanseatic ports, Denmark, the kingdom of Sardinia, Lombardy, Algeria, 
Greece, and several South American States. Its adoption after a few years 
has been decreed by the governments of Spain and Portugal. 
Besides Great Britain and its dependencies, the only commercial nations 
of importance, which do not already use the metrical ton, are the United 
States of America, Russia, Sweden, Turkey, and Egypt. There can be no 
doubt that these latter countries would adopt it, if Great Britain led the way. 
The metrical ton being the weight of a cubic metre of water equal to 1000 
kilogrammes, while the British ton is nearly 1015 kilogrammes, or 14 per 
cent in excess, it is evident that no objection can arise from the adoption of 
the former as the unit of ship’s tonnage by weight except the temporary in- 
convenience which accompanies every change whatsoever. A ship of 1000 
tons British weight would simply be 1015 metrical tons. 
According to a return issued by the Board of Trade, the exports from the 
United Kingdom in 1855, consisting of British and Irish produce and manu- 
factures, amounted in value to £95,688,085, or nearly £96,000,000. The 
countries which use the metrical ton, and are included in this statement of 
exports, are as follows :— 
Prussia, Hanover, and the Hanseatic £ 
PGS sete ers ecto Roe amity alee cc 9,787,600 
PADGE! cc eesce tc as ane ar ealgn aes 6,012,658 
ROMANTIC go ee caso '. < teatatenewiniasalgnt’s atasi(eis's 4,558,210 
SaVCI a. oc.s ctx = sides ae ¢ <i8.9.98 90-NP es | aR 
LDRCU Nee citar s ca’ ss oa tae acnens aes lee 
DEMME ee sence ce ee eines siege ns 1,707,693 
Barincal)s:: igor sae ee ae ee 1,475,713 
EI cre ne a gn ais Pe ie Reads 1 
Denar: os ..6 se | te eri MA eee eR TE 
New Grenada...... Re Lt rthert Sule x 588,935 
MGxICON Sot Leis nets aca: 1) apo ioe 
ee 
£28,315,207 
* See my ‘ Narrative of the Origin and Formation of the International Association for ob- 
taining a Uniform Decimal System of Measures, Weights andCoins.’ I have republished at 
pp. 51, 52, the memorial referred to; and at pp. 9—11, 47—49, I have given an account of 
similar efforts in the United States by President Adams, the Hon. George Bancroft, and others. 
+ ‘Remarks on the Tonnage Admeasurements of Ships,’ published in Moorsom’s ‘ Brief 
Review,’ pp. 175—179, 
