On Tuesday, Mr. Ashton Dilke brought forward in the House
of Commons an abstract resolution in favour of the immediate introduction of a decimal system of coinage and decimal weights and measures. In reply, Mr. Chamberlain made a very powerful speech, showing the difficulty of the step and the objections to it. In the first place, if they were to be introduced only per- missively, and brought into use concurrently with our present coinage and weights and measures, the confusion would only be worse confounded, or else the permission would be a mere dead-letter. If they were to be made compulsory, they would involve a loss of at least from five to ten millions, in substituting the new weights and measures in all the great workshops and manufactories of Abe country for those now in use. In great iron works, such as those at Middlesborough, the cost would be enormous. Again, as to decimal coinage ; if the decimal coinage alone were introduced, and not decimal weight's and measures at the same time, the advantage gained would be vastly diminished. Moreover, which of the decimal systems of coinage was to be preferred P If the decimal division of the pound sterling, the gain might be great to the higher commerce, but the lose of the poor by the sacrifice of the penny—their unit--would be serious. If the penny were kept as the unit, then 8s. 4d. would. have to be the chief gold .coin, and that would be too small, while a coin of double the value would not be included in the decimal system. At present, the great bulk of the population was certainly not prepared to accept the decimal system. Mr. Dilke merged his resolution. in Mr. Anderson's amendment for a Committee of Inquiry, and that was negatived by 108 votes against 28. For a decimal coinage, the Liberal majority are evidently well disposed to wait long, and to wait without unseemly impatience.
Previous page
