“ decimil,” and the one-hundredth part of a millilitre as a “ cen- 
timil.” — Am. Druggist, A. Y., 1906, v. 48, p. 43. 
“ Gnomon,” discussing the defects which have been pointed out in 
the metric system, asserts that perhaps the gravest defect of the 
system is the needlessly long terminology He points out that much of 
the opposition might be overcome if during the inevitable transition 
period the metre were called the metric yard, the half litre the metric 
pint, and the half kilogram the metric pound. — Pharm. J., Lond., v. 
22, p. 524. 
Plowright, Charles H., discusses and illustrates the origin of the 
symbols used to designate scruple, drachm, and ounce in medicine. — 
Ibid., v. 22, pp. 583-586. 
An editorial refers jocularly to these wicked fellows who would 
introduce the metric system of weights and measures to take the 
place of the cumbrous lack of system under which the rear-guard of 
the druggists are now laboring and under which they can not say 
whether an ounce of sulphuric acid is 437.5 grains, 480 grains, or 
830.1 grains. — Drug. Circ. & Chem. Gaz., X. Y., 1906, v. 50, p. 391. 
Goodman, F. M., is quoted as protesting against the adoption of 
the metric system by the departments of the U. S. Government. He 
believes that this system was originated by a consummate rascal and 
that the liability to err in its use is almost beyond belief. — Drug 
Topics, X. Y., 1906, v. 21, p. 100. 
Hollis, H. G., is quoted as pointing out the difference in the length 
of the American and British yard. He says : 
If a mile were measured in England it would be found that a mile would 
be three inches and six hundred and sixty-seven thousandths of an inch longer 
than an American mile. * * * The Canadian standard is based not upon 
the old yard in London but upon an American standard, which in turn was 
taken from Washington and is an integral part of a metric bar. — Western 
Druggist, 1906, v. 28, p. 311. 
Halsey, F. A., in discussing the introduction of the metric system, 
asserts that the changing of a people’s system of weights and meas- 
ures is a task of mountainous difficulty and of endless confusion. So 
great is the task that it is safe to say that no nation in modern times 
has ever completed it. — Xat. Druggist, St. Louis, 1906, v. 36, pp. 
19-21. 
An editorial discusses the paper by F. A. Halsey, and asserts that 
even in France, where the metric system has been compulsory for more 
than a century, it is not yet in universal use. It was established in 
Germany some thirty or forty years ago and still the old units pre- 
vail there to a very great extent, as they prevail in all the other 
metric countries. — Ibid., v. 36, pp. 2-3. 
A book review comments on, “ The Metric Fallacy,” by Frederick 
A. Halsey; and “ The Metric Failure in Textile Industry.” by Samuel 
K, 7 J t/ 
