220 
BRITISH PHARMACEUTICAL CONFERENCE. 
Avoirdupois pounds. 
10 centigrammes = 1 decigramme . . . 1/544 
10 decigrammes = 1 gramme .... 15*44 
10 grammes = 1 decagramme . . . 154*4 
10 decagrammes = 1 hectogramme . . 1544*0 
10 hectogrammes = 1 kilogramme . . . 2*2057 
10 kilogrammes = 1 myriagramme . . 22*057 
It is also convenient to reverse the comparison, and state the value of the En¬ 
glish weights in those of the metric scale, thus :— 
• 
English. French grammes. 
G-rain. 0*0648 
Scruple. 1*296 
Dram. 8*888 
Ounce.31*104 
Pound (troy). 373*248 
„ (avoirdupois) . . 497*664 
In Italy, weights more or less resembling the English are used in the Roman 
States ; but in the Venetian they bear the names of grain, pennyweight, ounce, 
and pound, while the distribution is decimal. The grain is about 1^ grain, the 
pennyweight is the French gramme, the ounce is a little more than our troy ounce, 
and the pound a little less than 3 troy pounds. At Baden, while they have 
pharmaceutical weights similar to the English, they have for other purposes a 
decimal system, the smallest weight being 0*77 grain and the pound 7720 grains. 
Thus, while we find a decimal system almost universally used in scientific che¬ 
mistry, where the quantities simply require to be expressed upon paper, calcu¬ 
lated and compared; we find for practical use, where the quantities are actually 
to be used, divided mechanically, proportioned to one another or to change of ' 
circumstances, that the old systems have been retained with greater persistence ; 
and while decimal weights have been adopted for commercial purposes, that the 
long-used systems have retained their hold upon the medical profession. This 
is not so much an indication that the weights used are better in the abstract 
than others which might be adopted, as it is an indication of the strong feeling 
which exists in favour of uniformity in medical weights, and against changes 
which are sure to be followed, for a time, by doubt and difficulty, if not by mis¬ 
takes of the gravest consequence. 
What objections are there to the use of the English apothecaries’ weights for 
pharmaceutical purposes ? 
In the abstract there is little to be said against it. The gr. 9i. 5 L ^i. and lb. 
are all convenient units for practical use. The relation which they bear to one 
another, though a sort of haphazard affair, is not inconvenient. The lb. divides into 
i and ^; a and without dividing the ounce. The ounce divides into and 
without involving fractions of the dram. The dram divides into \ and ^ ; a, £ 
and ; £ and -A-, without dividing the grain. The grain is a small enough 
unit, and the pound a large enough unit for medical use. The objections are 
almost all external to the system itself ; they arise out of its relation to other 
systems, from which, in practice, it cannot be abstracted ; and this fact let us 
keep in view as a caution against systems which appear promising when seen 
only upon paper. However good they may be in the abstract availeth not, for 
they must be judged by their readiness to fit into other systems,—to fill their 
own place well and work harmoniously with all collateral institutions. It is in 
these points that the shortcomings of our present system are found. While we 
buy and sell by one weight, and dispense by another, both of which have units 
bearing the same names, but of different values; while we have ounces of water, 
which, though used for dispensing purposes, correspond to the commercial 
weights, and drams of water which do not agree with either the apothecaries’ or 
