one of the many fallacies which has grown up and been fostered in regard to it—that the metric system is the perfection of scientific accuracy, and as such entitled to veneration in the highest degree. The fact that a local writer, Mr. Thomas Ranken, of Lismore, Richmond River, has in a thoughtful work given able attention to this portion of the subject, all the more disinclines me to discuss it, but I cannot refrain from paying him the compliment of making the following extract from his essay, "Measure for Measure," which fairly crystallises what might be said in this connection. He points out: "Notwithstanding all the fuss that has been made over this system as a scientific system, which all the world should follow, the fact of the matter is that it is thoroughly unscientific, unmathematical in its basis; and its unit, the metre, or measure, except for its being [assumed] 1/10000000th part of the quarter circumference of the earth, is a measure of nothing."
The French adopted this system in 1793, when the Revolution was in full swing. Then the conquering legions of that country carried it with them into Belgium and other neighboring States. In its home the system had an uncertain existence for many years, but by the end of the nineteenth century it received adoption in all the countries of Europe except the United Kingdom and Russia. If "the course of true love never did run smoothly," it is also true that the introduction of this system into various Principalities, Kingdoms, and Empires was not unattended with difficulties; and, hereafter, more particular attention will be paid to the troubles which arose.
