Imperial Measures — The Origins

British Weights and Measures Association. Original article preserved for historical and educational reference.

This is a brief description of how some of our measures have evolved, rather than be arbitarily imposed upon us. That is why they have lasted so long. It is followed by a letter from Sam Malin in reply to a Canadian e-mail received via this site.

The imperial system has its origins in the mists of time. The ancient Egyptians certainly used a version to build the pyramids. It is based upon human quantities, ie. an inch is a "thumb", a foot is a ... er.. foot! Another standard for an inch was three barleycorns. A yard is the distance between your outstretched hand and nose, etc. A cupful is the amount of water you can hold in your cupped hands. A hundredweight is the most a person can carry. A handy sized throwing stone weighs a pound.

Imperial measures are usually based on 12's or 16's because these can be divided into fractions.

The metric system was devised at the time of the French Revolution in a frenzy of destruction of all things ancient. In 1795 they calculated (inaccurately) the distance between the north pole and the equator and divided it by ten million to produce the metre. It related to nothing on a human scale although was a bit larger than a yard. Everything is based on the unit ten which is very inflexible, albeit easy to calculate. If it was such a good system why do the French pack their wine bottles in boxes of 12?! A third of a metre is an infinite number! Actually Napoleon detested the metric system!

The metric system has never been adopted voluntarily. It was a criminal offence to use the old imperial system in France, just as it has now been made so in Britain.

V Linacre arr D Delaney

Reply from Sam Malin

Your letter to BWMA was forwarded to me, a fellow Canadian. You obviously live in a different Canada from me, or, perhaps more accurately you see the world, or at least Canada, through metric-tinted glasses.

Let's walk together from my apartment on Burdett Avenue in Victoria. As we leave the drive we pass the 5 mph sign on the left; we turn left — ah there is the entrance to the law courts parking lot Max Height 6'7" (1.98m) is marked. I offer you a coke "on tap" at the Macs — is that 8oz 12oz or 16oz. Shall we drop into Safeway — you show me lots of metric packaging (often with exact equivalents of Canadian units e.g. 568 ml, 454 g etc). But then I draw your attention to the Lucerne butter in a plastic container labelled 1 lb. And I drag a reluctant you to the loose fruits and vegetables where, like everywhere else in Canada, they are priced and sold in pounds and ounces (with kg and g sometimes indicated).

You are pretty upset and say let's take the ferry to Vancouver to get away from these "imperial" units. Again with apparent shock, you notice that the distances to the ferry terminal and intermediate towns like Sidney are given in miles as well as km. When we arrive at the terminal, the boards giving the fares state that vehicles over 20 feet (no metric equivalent given) long. We arrive in Tsawassen, on the Vancouver side, driving to Vancouver we pass some small farms for sale — 25 acres, 45 acres, no hectares.

Lets go fishing. We can compare the weight of catch with the other people fishing. We always talk pounds and ounces. Shall we go diving at Deep Cove — even the up-to-date internet site gives all depths in fathoms. Can you fathom that? I'd go the extra mile for you but I fear if I give you an inch you'll take a yard. I hope I'm not getting miles off subject. Our measurements. Our language. Our culture.

I could go on and on and on. The point is Imperial is not held to by "sticks in the mud". It is our culture. Our system. Metric has been forced on Canadians against even the will of the engineering profession.

Accuracy

Where a metric unit exists along with a standard Canadian equivalent, neither one nor the other is more accurate. In 1959, all countries using traditional units such as inches, feet, miles etc. decided that an inch would be defined as 25.4 mm exactly. Other traditional units were similarly defined (1 pound = 453.59237 g exactly). This means that Canadian units are as standardized and as accurate as any metric unit. As for evidence of this, consider the fact that man was put on the Moon, a task requiring almost unimaginable accuracy and precision, using customary units.

Decimals and Fractions

Metricators will sometimes say that decimals are more accurate than fractions. Decimals and fractions are not mutually exclusive, they are both useful and available for use. The Canadian system is decimal friendly. On the other hand, the fact that 12 and 16 can be more easily divided into convenient fractions does mean that the Canadian system is more fraction friendly than the metric system.

The Base 10 Myth

The fact that metric units are base ten in fact has virtually no relevance either to day-to-day life or to scientific and engineering manipulation. This is because conversion between units of the same dimension is rarely necessary or useful. There is a simple piece of empirical evidence that points to the fact that the entire world can handle units that are not in base ten — Time. Nowhere are there 100 seconds in a minute, 100 minutes in an hour and 10 hours in a day. And yet the world manages to tell time and to calculate time-related problems.

Human Scale of Canadian Units

Another factor is that our customary units are simply more human because they are developed in reference to the scale of the human body. An excellent example of this is length where a foot and an inch are directly derived from lengths found on our own bodies. Centimetres — an arbitrarily-defined unit — are too small; metres are too big, and millimetres are far too small.

Napoleon on Metrication

"The scientists adopted the decimal system on the basis of the metre as a unit. Nothing is more contrary to the organization of the mind, memory and imagination. The new system will be a stumbling block and source of difficulties for generations to come. It is just tormenting the people with trivia." — Napoleon Bonaparte

(The French people in fact did not readily take to the metric system. They only seriously began using it when forced to by legislation in the 1840s.)

One World or a World of Traditions

It is often said that the rest of the world uses the metric system so we must also. The value of our cultural heritage is vastly more valuable than simply putting up signs with bridge heights in metres instead of feet because others do so. The most fundamental reasons why metrication should be stopped in its tracks is because it is an unnecessary destruction of part of our culture and heritage.

Conclusion

I am not against voluntary use of the metric system. I accept that in certain scientific and engineering realms it is widely used. However, I am not comfortable with it, least of all in my day-to-day life.

Best regards,
Sam Malin, P. Eng.

Design & Layout © S-Print 2001. Text copyright of individual contributors.