196 



THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND ARCHITECT'S JOURNAL. 



[JUNB",; 



or from want of capacity, but because such calculations require special 

 proficiency, and tliey either use a price-book, or, if the case requires 

 it, resort to a surveyor. 



Copyright of Designs as Distinguished from Patentable Inventions. 

 By Wm. Spence, Assoc. Inst. C.E., patent agent. London: V. 

 and R. Stevens, 1847. 



The object of this pamphlet is to show the exact degree of protec- 

 tion afforded by the registration of designs, and in particular to show 

 that it does not supersede a patent. It carries out, therefore, the in- 

 terpretations of the Registration Act, in thesjme view that we origi- 

 nally took on the passing of the act. We then showed that registra- 

 tion gave no [irotection lor the principle of a design — only for the form. 

 If, for example, a round cullender were registered, an oval cullender 

 ■would beheld to be no infringement. We may observe, by the bye, that 

 the Registrar takes on himself to decide on what designs ought to be 

 registered, whereas his jurisdiction is merely limited to the determi- 

 nation of the class in which the design is to be placed. If, however, 

 a Registrar is to exercise any jurisdiction at all, it is desirable that an 

 engineer should hold the appointment; so that at any rate the services 

 of a competent authority may be secured. 



DECIMAL WEIGHTS, MEASURES, AND MONEY. 



One of the lesser public questions of the day, which is of special 

 interest to our readers, is that concerning the tithing of money, 

 weights, and measures; and which is the more worthy of notice, as it 

 is making way on the road from theory to practice, as the new rupee, 

 two-shilling piece, or tithe of a pound, will show. 



The root of the whole matter is this, that our way of numbering, 

 fixed by our mother tongue, is by tens, as one, two, &c., ten, eleven, 

 twenty, twenty-one, thirty, forty, a hundred, a thousand, ten thou- 

 sand, &c. We have also other usual ways, sucli as by twelves, as 

 one dozen, one dozen-and-a-half, two dozen, and so forth ; and by 

 twenties, as a score, two score, three score and five, and so forth. 



The Wiiy of numbering by tens is that followed in most tongues, and 

 by all the higher races of mankind from the beginning of time; whereas 

 some of the lower races can count only by twos or by threes, or as far 

 as four at the utmost — all numbers beyond being out of their power to 

 reckon. 



The kind of notations now used, called Arabic, agrees well with 

 the words, as 1, 10, 11, 20, 21, 30, 100, 1,000, 10,000. 



All this is so very simple — it is so readily learned in our babyhood — 

 it seems sotriBing — that we are likely to be blamed for naming it; and 

 yet what is the answer to what we are going to ask, — "Why do we not 

 follow up the way in which we begin?" 



One of the evils we now find in all our dealings and reckonings, is 

 that we have all kinds of weights, measures, and money — only one of 

 ■which in any way agrees witli our way of numbering and reckoning. 

 Some of our ways of measuring or weighing are by twos, some by 

 threes, others by fours, eights, tens, twelves, sixteens, and twenties; 

 in some cases even by fractions. If we buy by weight, we reckon by 

 twenty, by one hundred and twelve, and by sixteen ; we pay by 

 twenty, by twelve, and by four; and we do the sum by ten — whereas 

 if we bought by tens, paid bv tens, and counted by tens, the opera- 

 tion would be easy, instead of being needlessly troublesome. 



It is now some time since the state of our weights and measures 

 awakened the notice of learned men. In the beginning of the last 

 hundred years, a lawsuit showed that the Customs otEeers were using 

 a wrong measure; while the Royal Society, having turned their atten- 

 tion to the measurement of the earth, found it needful to look into the 

 standards of measurement used here. The Royal Society exchanged, 

 in 1742, with the French Academy of Sciences, a set of standard 

 measures and weights. These proceedings showed great differences 

 between the standards kept at the Exchequer, Tower, Guildhall, Mint, 

 Clockmakers' Company, Founders' Company, &c. In 1758 and 1759, 

 a Parliamentary Committee was named to look into the standard. 

 This Committee had a standard yard, and standard troy pound, made. 

 In 17G5, bills were brought in for establishing new standards, but fell 

 to the ground. This Committee wished to use the pound troy instead 

 of the poimd avoirdupois. 



In 1779, Lord Swinlon tried, but fruitlessly, to get the English 

 standards used in Scotland, as agreed in the Act of Union. He wrote 

 a book upon this matter. 



In 1798, Sir George Shuckburgh Evelyn made further enquiries into 

 the state of the standards, which he published in the transactions of 

 the Royal Society. 



Before this, however, the Rev. Dr. George Skene Keith, who hal 

 laboured on the matter for more than thirty years, wrote a pamphlet in 

 1791, proposing a decimal system of weights, measures, and monies. 



In 1795, the French, in their revolutionary madness for sweeping 

 away every old law and custom, decimalized every kind of weight, 

 measure, and money, on a plan which is called the metrical svstem, 

 its first unit being a metre, the ten millionth part of a quadrant of 

 the great circle. The French supposed they had laid their system 

 on a natural and plain basis; but after investigations have left this a 

 matter of doubt. 



Our brethren in America had already adopted the dollar as their 

 money unit, and divided it by tens into dimes and cents; but they 

 have kept our weights and measures. 



With the year 1800, a new agitation began for a change here. 

 Professor Playfair and others wanted to have the French system, but 

 happily they did not succeed. It was soon found that the French 

 metrical system, having no fellowship with the old system of weights 

 and measures, was not followed by the people, who could not be made 

 to understand it ; and the end was, that while the pure metrical system. 

 was kept for scientific purposes, it was for popular purposes provided 

 with old names, and was called the "usual" svstem; thus a double 

 metre was called a toise, a third of the metre was called a foot, a half 

 kilogram a pound, an eighth of ahectolitM>« bushel, and so forth. 

 This was fully established in 1816. 



In 1813, a Committee of the House of Commons was named, who 

 published a report, and in 1818 a Royal Commission was named for 

 weights and measures ; under which, reports were published in 1819, 

 1820, and 1821. In 1824 and 1825 acts were passed, which named 

 the standards, called " imperial standards," which abolished all local 

 weights and measures, and reduced the number of standards. 



The greatest evil attendant upon the "imperial" measurement is, 

 that the nevp gallon is made to contain ten pounds avoirdupois weight 

 of distilled water, whereby the size in cubic inches is 277.274, giving a 

 number most inconvenient for calculation. 



In 1821, the American legislature took up the subject, and a mosf 

 valuable report was drawn up by Mr. John Quincy Adams, afterwards 

 President, who was in favour of the French metrical system. No 

 important result has, however, been achieved in America. 



Professor Robert Wallace, Mr. John Wilson, of Thornley, and others, 

 proposed modifications of the English system, and published pamph- 

 lets upon it. In 1831 and 1832, General Pasley published a work 

 suggesting a new standard and a decimal system, which he further 

 carried in a second edition, published in 1834, and which for the 

 labour bestowed upon it, is well worthy of being read. He pro- 

 posed as a standard a fathom of the thousandth part of the nautical 

 mile, which he adapted to the present systems of measurement, with- 

 out causing much change in the value, though he introduces many 

 new terms. His remarks upon the modes of measurement now in use 

 are p irticularly valuable. , 



Mr. Babbage has been another labourer on this subject. 



Since these, Professor De Morgan has repeatedly brought the deci- 

 mal system before the notice of the public, and has written upon it. 

 We have likewise made some remarks in a former volume of the 

 Journal. 



In the presentsession, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, having been 

 questioned by Dr. Bowring, has agreed, as a first step, to coin a two- 

 shilling piece. 



However desirable it might be, in a theoretical point of view, to carry 

 out forthwith any given system, experience has fully shown in France, 

 that the only practicable way of gettingan efficient and working system, 

 is by conforming, so far as possible, with existing institutions and the 

 habits of the people. The French "metrical" system bus become 

 the " usual" system, and as such works well, while most of theoretical 

 advantages are already obtained. It is in conformity with this expe- 

 rience that any attempts must be made in England, and indeed this is 

 pretty commonly allowed; although there are many differences of 

 opinion as to details in carryii g out a decimal system. 



The great difference is as to the units and standards to be adopted. 

 It has been assumed by some that a natural and invariable standard is 

 to be looked for, which can always be referred to ; and the measure of 

 a degree of the meridian, the length of a pendulum, a quantity of 

 distilled water, and variousothersuch standards, have been proposed; 

 but the attempt is perfectly fu'.ile, for there is no such natural standard. 

 Captain Kater's imperial gallon is just as good a natural standard as 

 the French metre, and it resolves itself into this — that all such units 

 are arbitary ; and that therefore, instead of inventing a new arbitrary- 

 unit, it is better to adopt an old arbitary unit. 



Whatever weight may have been at one time given to the French 

 metrical system, it can no longer be allowed, for it is found not to rest 

 on a natural standard, while the French have failed in enforcing it. 



