[To THE EDITOR OF TItZ "SPECTATOR:]
Sig,—The advantages of decimal calculations ought not to be mixed up with the question whether we do or do not adopt the metre for our standard. Nor is it necessary to discuss the advantages of the "precious dozen." No doubt something may be said in favour of duodecimal notation, but it is out of the question as a practical policy now. One thing we may do, and that is adopt the cental of a hundred pounds for a hundredweight instead of the hundred and twelve pounds which it now weighs. As the present ton is now two thousand two hundred and forty pounds, it would have to be altered, and perhaps the right thing would be to take ten hundred- weights for a ton of a thousand pounds. But whether that is done or not, it is surely desirable that the eight-pound stone by which a butcher bays meat and the fourteen-pound stone by which be and most other people sell should be altered to one of ten pounds. A ten-pound stone would be a con- venient weight for many things, and half-stones, quarter- stones, and so on could be used by all those who prefer weighing in that way to saying so many pounds and a half, or a quarter, as the case may be. As to the new coins, the five-shilling pieces are very good to look at, if useless, and the half-crowns are good for tips. The five-shilling piece, too, will be two hundred and fifty of the new farthings (when they come) and the half-crown a hundred and twenty-five, so no great harm will be done. In the meantime, let us hope that more florins and shillings will be coined. Some day we shall get a decimal coinage, but we may as well get a reason- able hundredweight, whatever else we get, and as the Chan- cellor will apparently, reduce all our money to fractions,
perhaps it will not matter.—I am, Sir, d:c., E. E.
Previous page
