%S,ST')  •  Herbert  Spencer  and  the  Metric  System.  127 
Having  shown  that  a  "  mixed  system  would  in  large  part  remain," 
and  that  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  certain  incongruities  which 
necessarily  result  from  the  use  of  a  decimal  system,  the  author  pro- 
ceeds  as  follows :  "  We  agree  in  condemning  the  existing  arrange- 
ments under  which  our  scheme  of  numeration  and  our  modes  of 
calculation  based  on  it,  proceed  in  one  way,  while  our  various 
measures  of  length,  area,  capacity,  weight,  value,  proceed  in  other 
ways.  Doubtless,  the  two  methods  of  procedure  should  be  unified  ; 
but  how  ?  You  assume  that,  as  a  matter  of  course,  the  measure 
system  should  be  made  to  agree  with  the  numeration  system ;  but 
it  may  be  contended  that,  conversely,  the  numeration  system  should 
be  made  to  agree  with  the  measure  system — with  the  dominant 
measure  system,  I  mean."  This  "  dominant  measure  system  "  is, 
according  to  Spencer,  the  duodecimal  system.  It  is  shown  that  it 
is  quite  as  easy  to  form  a  numerical  system  based  upon  twelve  as  it 
was  originally  to  build  up  a  system  having  ten  as  a  basis.  It  is 
claimed  also  that  "  It  needs  only  a  small  alteration  in  our  method  of 
numbering  to  make  calculation  by  groups  of  twelve  exactly  similar 
to  calculation  by  groups  of  ten  ;  yielding  just  the  same  facilities  as 
those  now  supposed  to  belong  only  to  decimals."  But  perhaps  the 
strongest  of  the  claims  for  a  duodecimal  system  is  the  need  for  easy 
division  into  aliquot  parts,  twelve  being  divisible  into  halves,  quar- 
ters, thirds  and  sixths,  while  the  divisibility  of  ten  is  of  the  smallest. 
That  such  a  claim  is  not  without  foundation  is  evident  if  we  look 
into  the  history  of  weights  and  measures.  While  "  numeration  by 
tens  and  multiples  of  tens  has  prevailed  among  civilized  races  from 
early  times,"  they  have  departed  from  this  system  in  their  tables  of 
weights,  measures  and  values,  the  tendency  being  toward  "  systems 
of  easily  divisible  quantities." 
That  Spencer  was  cognizant  of  the  peculiar  merits  and  aims  of 
the  metric  system  cannot  be  denied,  nor,  on  the  other  hand,  was  he 
unmindful  of  the  difficulties  which  would  attend  the  introduction  of 
a  new  system  of  numeration  and  measure  like  that  of  the  duo- 
decimal. 
He  objected  to  the  metric  system  "  on  the  ground  that  it  is  incon- 
venient for  various  purposes  of  daily  life,  and  that  the  conveniences 
it  achieves  may  be  achieved  without  entailing  any  inconveniences." 
Lest  Spencer's  position  should  not  be  rightly  interpreted  from 
this  necessarily  condensed  treatment  of  his  article,  the  following  is 
quoted  in  extenuation: 
