TRANSACTIONS OP THE SECTIONS. 149 



"In subtraction, multiplication, and division, the advantage of the metric system 

 is still greater. In calculations of length, capacity, square and cubic measure, the 

 proportion in favour of the metric system would be less than 5 to 1 in some cases, 

 and in others much greater. 



" The next advantage of the metric system arises from all its weights, measures 

 of capacity, square and cubic measure being directly and decimally derived from the 

 metre, and consequently being directly and decimally related one to the other." 

 (Numerous tables were exhibited to illustrate this.) 



The author then entered into some elaborate calculations to show that the univer- 

 sally received English equivalent of the metre was incorrect (notwithstanding that 

 it had been sanctioned and adopted by the Royal Society, by a Royal Commission 

 appointed to investigate the matter, and by the Houses of Lords and Commons) 

 therefore the given English equivalents of all the weights and measures of the 

 metric system were false. The author showed by demonstration that the abso- 

 lutely correct English equivalent of the metre was 1 metre=39-370387542944176 

 (38024691) inches [38024691 being a recurring series of decimals], say 1 metre = 

 39-37039 inches ; whereas the universally received equivalent is 1 metre =39-37079 

 inches. He pointed out that this error was increased in a square measure bv the 

 square of the error; and in measures of weight, capacity, and cubic measure by the 

 cube of the error, since all metric weights and measures are derived from the metre 

 by squaring and cubing. He showed that this error was far too great to be allowed 

 to remain uncorrected, and gave several instances in which it would partly account 

 for certain apparent discrepancies in terrestrial and astronomical measurements in 

 different countries, stating, as a familiar illustration, that this error would make a 

 difference of about 1000 miles in the given distance of the sun from the earth. 



The author proceeded : " A Bill was lately passed by both Houses of Parliament, 

 making legal in this country the use of the metric system of weights and mea- 

 sures. Attached to this Bill was a table or schedule which professed to give the 

 metric equivalents of the English weights and measures ; which equivalents are 

 declared by the Bill to be binding on all traders using the metric system. Not onlv 

 was this schedule founded on the incorrect datum that 1 metre = 39-37079 (the 

 correct datum being 1 metre =39-37039), but it did not harmonize even with its 

 own datum. According to this Bill, a dekametre, that is 10 metres, or 100 deci- 

 metres, or 1000 centimetres, or 10,000 millimetres, if reckoned from the Govern- 

 ment schedule, 



as a dekametre, is a certain quantity ; 



if as 10 metres, is a second different quantitv ; 



if as 100 decimetres is, a third quantity ; 



if as 1000 centimetres, is a fourth quantity ; 



if as 10,000 millimetres, a fifth quantity. 



So that we have five different English equivalents given to represent the same 

 measure, not one of which quantities is correct after all. 



_ " For measures of surface, a hectare, that is 10 dekares, 100 ares, or 10,000 cen- 

 tiares if reckoned from the Government schedules tables as, 

 a hectare, is one quantity ; 

 in dekares, is another quantity ; 

 • in ares, is a third quantitv ; 



in centiares, is a fourth quantitv 

 not one of which quantities is after all correct. 



" For measures of weight, a myriagram, which is equal to 10 kilograms, or 100 

 hectograms, or 1000 dekagrams, is according to the Government schedule (when 

 brought into English quantities), if reckoned as a myriagram, one quantity ; if in 

 kilograms, a second different quantity; if in hectograms, a third different quantity 

 if in dekagrams, a fourth different quantity; not one of which is correct. 



" I fear that this Bill with this schedule may prove worse than useless, and it is 

 only because I believe that it will be very mischievous, and may lead to endless 

 litigation, and prevent the metric system "ever taking root in this country, that I 

 reluctantly raise my voice to endeavour to stop its action, and get it amended before 

 it has done any serious evil. Indeed, in disputed cases, were I judge, I should not 



