100 YEARS AGO
Commons to urge upon the Government the compulsory adoption of the metric system of weights and measures on January 1, 1901. Several of the delegates described the advantages which the metric system possesses, reference being made to the great waste of timeinvolved in teaching our complicated system of arithmetic, and the loss of trade resulting from the use of a system not understood by other nations. In reply, Mr. Ritchie expressed himself in agreement with the arguments in favour of the metric system, but stated that his own view, and that of his colleagues, was that chaos and confusion would be created by the compulsory adoption of the metric system in this country, and it would be practically impossible to carry
out a compulsory law on the subject. They had not only passed a law two years ago to make the metric system legal, but they had also added to their Board of Trade standards the standards for the metric system, and only seventeen of the whole of the local authorities in the country had come toverify their standards.
Some bookmarks relating to Metric Syatem
Proponents of the metric system in the U.S. often claim that "the United States, Liberia, and Burma (or Myanmar) are the only countries that have not adopted the metric system." This statement is not correct with respect to the U.S., and probably it isn't correct with respect to Liberia and Burma, either. The U.S. adopted the metric system in 1866. What the U.S. has failed to do is to restrict or prohibit the use of traditional units in areas touching the ordinary citizen: construction, real estate transactions, retail trade, and education. The U.S. has not made the crucial transition from "soft metric" to "hard metric", so that "1 pint (473 mL)" becomes "500 mL (1.057 pint)", with the traditional equivalent fading into smaller type sizes and finally disappearing.
The use of the metric system made legal (but not mandatory) in the United States by the (Kasson) Metric Act of 1866 (Public Law 39-183) [See: Page 1 and Page 2]. This law also made it unlawful to refuse to trade or deal in metric quantities. http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/dates.htm
Lack of public interest and support has prevented the metric system from being adopted in the United States. http://encarta.msn.com/text_761561345___7/Metric_System.html
It is the use by our modern progressive country of an ancient system of weights and measures which it is here proposed to discuss and show up as an absurdity.
The annual expense of retaining the old system of weights and measures is over $300,000,000.
95 % of the world's people use the SI for all their measurement needs and since our international trade is a significant part of our national economy, it should be apparent that we cannot waste any more time. http://www.metricmethods.com/whatistheSI.html
The U.S. realized that it was very difficult for its industries to compete in a metric world. Other countries such as Japan, Britain and Germany were shipping products all over the world. It was difficult for the U.S. to compete because the standards were different and everything had to be converted to metric. Congress knew we had to change to the international standards for trade. In 1988, a trade act was adopted that made the metric system the preferred system of measurement for trade and commerce. http://www.michigan.gov/mda/0,1607,7-125-2961_2971_2972-8931--,00.html