NA TURE 



417 



THURSDAY, JUNE 2, 1921. 



Editorial and Publishing Offices: 



MACMILLAN &- CO., LTD., 



ST. MARTIN'S STREET. LONDON. W.C.I 



Advenisemcnts and business leners should be 

 addressed to the Pubhshers. 



Editorial communications to the Editor. 



Telegraphic Address: PHUSIS. LONDON. 

 Telephone Number: GERRARD 8830. 



The Metric System and World Trade. 



A SHORT time ago (March 29) Dr. C. E. 

 Guillaume contributed to the Paris 

 Academy of Sciences a paper on the obligatory 

 adoption of the metric system in Japan. The 

 recent Japanese law making the metric system 

 compulsory after a fixed period will no doubt 

 have considerable effect towards rendering the 

 system familiar in trade in the Far East, where 

 its use is already facultative in some countries. 

 Before arriving at this decision the Japanese 

 Government dispatched a Commission of Inquiry 

 to the principal trading centres of the world, so 

 that the present law represents the outcome of 

 prolonged and mature judgment, and as such 

 supplies very satisfactory evidence in support 

 of the international claims of the metric system. 

 The values of the old units of Japan have for 

 many years been defined in terms of the metre 

 and the kilogram, and, owing to this fact and to 

 the issue of regulations on the subject, the tradk 

 ing community has gradually become accustomed 

 to metric weights and measures. Dr. Guillaume 

 expects that in a few years the only weights and 

 measures permissible in eastern Asia will be 

 those of the metric system. The enormous strides 

 inade by this system in the Far East cannot be 

 without effect in the United States, where in the 

 past one of the principal arguments against it was 

 that British weights and measures were tacitly 

 recognised in China, Japan, and Siam. It appears 

 probable, therefore, that before long advocates of 



NO. 2692, VOL. 107] 



the metric system will be able to turn this line 

 of reasoning against their opponents. 



By its recent decision Japan has once, more 

 shown its readiness to change its customs in order 

 to adapt itself to changing needs. Its statesmen 

 have recognised that the metric system is the only 

 system of service for international trade, and 

 have, therefore, decided that their country shall 

 not be handicapped by traditional use and human 

 inertia from adopting new standards of measure- 

 ment. We have no patience with any other 

 policy. Whether a principle is sound or-not may 

 be discussed, and whether its adoption is ex- 

 pedient or not may also be a matter of opinion ; 

 but to suggest that a particular policy should not 

 be followed merely because there are many diffi- 

 culties in the way is to manifest a state of mind 

 which we fail to understand. The first thing to 

 decide in individual or national life is whether 

 an action is right ; and once having arrived at 

 an affirmative conclusion, difficulties are nothing 

 but obstacles to be surmounted boldly or swept 

 aside ruthlessly from the path of progress. 



This we conceive to be the true scientific spirit, 

 and by the use of it Japan has won the high 

 position which she now occupies among the 

 nations of the world. We must confess, however, 

 that in the matter of the adoption of the metric 

 system there are few signs that like action will 

 readily be taken in our own country. It is perhaps 

 not surprising that Lord Balfour of Burleigh's 

 Committee on Commercial and Industrial Policy 

 after the War should have reported that it was 

 not desirable to make a compulsory change in 

 our system of weights and measures ; but we ex- 

 pected something different from a committee ap- 

 pointed by the Conjoint Board of Scientific 

 Societies. The report of this committee was dealt 

 with in our issue of October 7 last, p. 169, and 

 the only satisfactory thing about it from our point 

 of view is that the Conjoint Board declined to 

 adopt the report, which was, therefore, published 

 on the authority of the committee alone. 



In justice to the committee it must be said 

 that the inquiry with which it was entrusted was 

 solely that of the compulsory adoption or other- 

 wise of the metric system in the United Kingdom, 

 and not the advantages or disadvantages of the 

 system in comparison with the British system of 

 weights and measures, or its scientific aspects in 

 general. Some of these subjects were, however, 

 discussed^ — not altogether impartially — by the 

 committee in its report; and the conclusion 



