A. 1. £73 14s. 8d. x II.

2. £286 17s. 44d. × 25. 3. £6178 16s. 2 d.÷7. B. I. (£8000-£347 18s. 2 d.)÷9. 2. Bring 4 ton 13 cwts. to ozs. 3. Multiply £76 18s. 34d. by 77. C. 1. Divide £871 3s. 8d. by 273. 2. How many shirts, each requiring 3 yds. I qr. I nl., can be made out of 200 yards? 3. Bring 817,635 grs. to lbs. ozs.,

etc.

D. I. How many boys could dine out of 26 lbs. 13 ozs. of beef, each requiring 3 ozs.?

2. What would 2 pints of milk daily cost at 3d. a quart for the 3 months of Oct., Nov., and Dec.

3. Divide £87 14s. 94d. by 4087.

A. 1. 7085 slates at Id. each. 2. 9183

3. 7481

4 d.

81d.

B. I. A bill,-3 lb. at 63. 9d., 8 lb. at 3s. 6d., 11 lb. at Is. 9d., and 24 lb. at 2s. 7d.

2. 8179 caps at Is. 91d. each.
3. If 3 yards cost 2s. 2 d., what
would 60 yards cost?

C. 1. 7643 at 8s. itd.

2. 15 ton 16 cwt. I qr., at £4 I2s. 4d. a ton.

3. A bill,-140 at 21d., 68 at 2s. 6d., 128 at 62d., and 905 at Ind.

STANDARD III.

D. 1. Divide the difference between half a million and 47,631 by 8063.

2. Bring 617,835 farthings to £s. d.

3. How many halfpenny postage stamps could be bought for £5 17s. 9d.

E. 1. If five oranges cost 2d., what would 1000 cost?

2. Divide 6 million 12 thousand and 15 by 80,091.

3.

F.

1.

2.

Bring 817,649 three-penny bits tos. d.

Take 817 farthings from £817. How much more or less than £100 are £17 18s. 2., £75 14s. 8d., and 18s. 41d. added together.

3. If ducks are 2s. 10 d. each, how many could be bought for £69 14s. 4 d.? STANDARD IV.

E. 1. If 3 tons of hay cost £14 12s. 3d., what would 4 cost?

tons

ADVANCED EXAMINATION. 1. Calculate and receipt the following bill:-14 yds. of silk at 4s. 9d., 243 yds. of calico at 5d., 7 yds. of velvet at 16s. 9d., 484 yds. of linen at Is. 44d., and 2 yds. of crape at 5s. 6d.

2. A, B, and C build a wall 92 yds. long, A doing 4 yds. more than B, and B 8 yds. more than C; what length was built by C?

3. If three million six hundred thousand pins be bought at Is. 3‡d. a 1000, and sold at 44d. a gross, how much is gained?

Most people are aware that for practical purposes they carry in their pockets very simple weights and measures. Half a crown is half an ounce; five shillings in one balance of a scales will equipoise a letter which a penny stamp will carry in a closed envelope; and, when the weight of foreign letters was a little more intricate than now, the ordinary bronze penny represented the unit allowed for French and German correspondence. There is little difficulty now about fixing the standard, but in early times, when science had not attained its present exactness, there were constant bickerings and wrangles. Perhaps the first successful attempt to obtain uniformity was achieved by Henry I., who settled the matter by a decision curiously arbitrary and final. The yard was to be the standard of every measure, and the length of the yard was not a matter of feet or inches, but was laid down once for all as the length of the King's arm. The decision was apparently simple, and intended to be final. The King often settled in person matters of dispute between his subjects, and, in differences as to questions of measurement, there could always be a ready reference to the Royal arm. In Edward II.'s time a new criterion was hit upon. The standard was settled by statute, which ordained that 'three barley-corns sound and dry should make an inch.' As compared with measurement by the Royal arm this standard was almost democratic in its suggestion, but the barleycorn showed unmistakably the predominance of the agricultural interest. The inch being thus ascertained, it was easy to construct from that datum the foot, yard, perch, and even the acre. The barleycorn, indeed, figures constantly in attempts to arrive at the methods of computation. The object, however, seems to have been to get a standard that was accessible rather than one that was invariable. The authorities realized that seeds plucked from the full ear were more popular as a reference than the proportions of the Royal arm. What was done with the inch had already been done with the ounce. The consent of the whole realm was obtained to the proposal put forward in the fiftyfirst year of Henry III. that twenty pennies should make an ounce, and that one penny should weigh thirty-two wheat-corns taken from

the midst of the ear of corn. And so matters stood for many years.

Perhaps it is within the present century that we are to date the first fixing of a really scientific standard. Here is a resolution of a Committee of the House, arrived at in 1814, and dealing with the subject:-'The length of a pendulum vibrating seconds in the latitude of London has been ascertained to be 39'13047 inches, of which the standard yard contains thirty-six.' By-and-bye, however, the pendulum theory was rejected. The substituted scheme was to provide for the restoration of standards by means of material copies which had been compared with them. For years the scientific men wrote, and consulted, and corresponded, and argued. The different standards, or rather examples of the standard, were found to disagree, and at last a mean was struck among all the varieties and the standard yard ascertained. It was in 1834 it was lost. It was in 1853 that it was constructed and deposited at the Exchequer. It is a bar thirty-eight inches long, and the thirty-six inches are measured on this. There is very learned language in the report describing how this measurement is made-language so learned as to be unintelligible except to quite an expert in scientific phraseology. This standard yard, as materially defined, is packed up in a box side by side with another box, which contains the standard 1lb. The yard is buried in mahogany, and the 1lb. in oak, and both are secured in a kind of stone coffin, and sunk in the vaulted strong room of the Exchequer.

So much for ourselves. In France they order these matters otherwise. They have been scientific, and have stuck to their science. The metre is the ten-millionth part of the distance from the Equator to the Pole, and, as that distance is not likely to alter, there is no primary need for the establishment of a standard which may be verified and then buried away. We fixed our unit of length in 1760. We lost it in 1834, and then we recovered it in 1853-at least an Act of Parliament says so. But the French have been at once more practical and more scientific. No burning of the Hotel de Ville or the Chamber of Deputies can destroy their standard. It will last so long as the distance from the Equator to the Pole endures.-Globe.