1884.] 
Our Measures and Our Standards. 
74i 
standard unit of capacity when hollow ; fifthly, the corre- 
sponding basic unit of weight should be the contents of the 
unit of solid or hollow measure, in some simple substance 
suited to the purpose, either solid or liquid. 
The first point is, “ Have we already any unit geometric- 
ally dealt with in the mode above described ? ” The cate- 
gorical answer is, “ No.” The more correct answer is, 
“ Nearly so, but spoilt by the mode of determining the 
Standards ; and it exists in only one instance.” 
We have a foot, a square foot (perhaps, though there is 
some doubt as to its visibility) ; the cubic foot in a solid 
form may also exist ; there is a capacity foot, in the form of 
a cylindrical metal bottle, termed a cubic foot measure; 
fifthly, there is Miller’s foot-weight, or a bronze weight that 
is supposed to represent the weight of a cubic foot of dis- 
tilled water at its utmost density, though it actually does 
not. 
Our five Standard Units are a miserably imperfect and 
incorredt set : if the objedt had been to scamp the work of 
construdtion and comparison as much as possible, that objedt 
is realised. We do not even know with any certainty 
whether the simple foot in length is corredt to old patterns, 
or, if so, to how many and to which ? Probably it is merely 
the third of a yard shown on an old parchment record in 
which the dividing lines are tolerably large holes. The 
square foot might perhaps not be very useful if made to a 
corredt standard, but it or some multiple of it might some- 
times be of use, and should certainly be at least constructed 
as a Standard for reference, as well as for affording facilities 
in constructing a true standard cubic foot. The solid cubic 
foot may exist as a Standard in metal, but it is very doubt- 
ful whether it exists in glass or in quartz, or any non-cor- 
rosible material, so as to be fit for the ulterior object — that 
of aiding in the direct construction of the capacity foot or 
hollow cubic foot, and in that of the foot-weight. The hol- 
low cubic foot, which should form the basic standard of 
capacity measure, certainly does not exist in the form of a 
metallic cylinder, resembling a tea-urn, but apparently not 
at all in its proper cubic form. It also appears that it was 
never constructed direct from the linear foot — that was per- 
haps too much trouble : the construdtion was based on a 
computation of what it should be, and perhaps also on an 
erroneous foot-weight; in other words, the direct construdtion 
was entirely avoided. Miller’s foot-weight, as everyone 
knows, was not made from an actual cubic foot of water ; 
he simply made a bronze weight of 62'32io6 pounds avoir- 
dupois, a quantity he had calculated to represent it. 
