The same decimal principle runs throughout the extension of the system to surfaces, solids, weights, etc.

Another advantage desired was to attain facility in reducing measurements of one kind to the corresponding expression in another; computing weights, for instance, from known solid contents. For this purpose the metre is carried out as the basis of all forms. All measures of length are tens or tenths of the metre. Measures of surface and of solid capacity are formed by employing linear measures in two or three directions, on the same principle as the superficial or solid foot is formed by measuring off a linear foot in two directions or in three. For weight, a cube of water measuring one centimetre in each dimension is taken as a theoretical unit, called one gram, or gramme; and multiples or aliquot parts of this, computed by tens, give the various measures of weight. The principle is further extended to the various kinds of measurement employed in the applied sciences, until a complete set of the tables seems like a complicated maze; but great ease and rapidity are the result in all the varied and difficult computations of scientific men.

A fourth advantage desired was the adoption of a common, uniform system. This is less important in this country-where the old-fashioned English tables have been very uniformly used throughout the States-than in Europe, where each nation, and often each little principality and canton, had its different system before the metric was adopted. Thus, a foot (Fuss) in HesseDarmstadt was less than ten inches, in Prussia a little more than twelve, and in Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt just above fifteen, and in other German States it varied between these limits.

According to President Barnard, no less than three hundred and ninety-one pound weights have been in use at different places in past times. Three hundred and seventy of these have been abandoned upon acceptance of the metric system. The metric system seeks to abolish confusion and uncertainty, and to harmonize the business of mankind upon one common system

of weights and measures. It was designed for uniform use throughout the civilized world. It is steadily gaining favor. An international convention, held in 1875, secured its acceptance so extensively that adoption everywhere seems to be only a question of time. In this country it was authorized, though not made obligatory, by act of Congress in 1866, which provided that standards should be prepared by the national government at Washington and furnished to the States. Many of the departmental bureaus and offices have voluntarily taken it. Scientific men, engineers, surveyors, and others use it extensively for private computations and in papers to be interchanged with each other, and will welcome the time when it is understood among tradesmen and workmen.*

THE CENTAL SYSTEM.

The cental system imitates the metric in employing decimal gradations; but is limited to merchandise of the bulkier kinds, such as have been sold by the bushel or gallon. Two important changes are implied in adopting it-dealing by weight and reckoning decimally. The familiar, old-fashioned system of selling the grains by bulk has steadily fallen into disfavor, in recent years, under the influence of the important fact that weight is a much truer indication of the value of grain. A bushel of first

* The metric system has been adopted by the United States Marine Hospital Service in all its departments; by the vital statisticians of New York, Boston, and other leading cities; and by a large number of State and County medical societies-among them the State Medical Societies of Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, New York, Georgia, and Kansas, the Medical Societies of the Counties of New York and Kings, and the American Medical Association-most of which bodies have recommended the use of it in papers and reprints, by medical boards, hospitals, and dispensaries, in describing and recording cases, by the faculties of colleges in instruction, and by physicians and druggists. In short, the medical profession in this country has pretty uniformly given its adhesion to the metric movement.-N. Y. Times, April 9, 1880.

quality wheat will weigh several pounds more than one of inferior grade, owing to the superior compactness or density of the kernels. The same principle applies to many other kinds of produce. If they are to be graded and sold according to value, this must be done by some system of selling by weight. So long as the sales are by measure, the buyer can have little assurance as to the quality he receives, but must depend upon warranties or inspection of samples. Moreover, carriers prefer to charge by weight; freights are usually computed by pounds or tons. The variations in the number of pounds which constitute a bushel in different localities cause perplexity also. In New York and in some other States, for example, the law gives thirty-two pounds to each bushel of oats; but some other States are not as generous-perhaps because, in fact, not more than thirty pounds will ordinarily go into a bushel measure. Consequently the system of measuring grain seems absurd, if its weight is to be regarded at all; and it brings much extra labor upon commission merchants. Numerous liquids, as syrups, oils, etc., vary much in weight, according to their quality, in some articles the better quality being lighter, and in others heavier; and it seems as reasonable to buy and sell them by the pound, as well as potatoes, eggs, etc., as it is sugar, coffee, and rice. Upon this view, the merchants in Produce Exchanges of many of the cities have advised the plan that sales shall be made by the hundred pounds, instead of by the bushel. The adoption of decimal reckoning is a natural and easy consequence; a pound, ten pounds, a hundred pounds (or cental), a thousand pounds, will be the quantities in which sales will usually be made.

CHAPTER XIII.

ADMIRALTY JURISDICTION.

ITS NATURE.

EVERY reader upon legal topics understands that all commercial nations have acknowledged a general system of “maritime law,” and have employed courts of“ admiralty jurisdiction” to administer it; that this law and these courts deal with controversies arising out of the management of ships, the carriage and delivery of cargoes, the employment and treatment of seamen, the award of damages for collisions between vessels, or of compensation for salvage of vessels in peril of wreck, the condemnation and sale of ships captured as prize of war, and the punishment of crimes on board ship. All jurisdiction of this nature was by our Constitution reserved from the States, and vested, by general language, in the courts of the Union. The manner in which the scope of this jurisdiction has grown to meet the wants of growing American commerce forms a good illustration of the expansibility of our jurisprudence, and shows that if the law is administered in the future in the same spirit as has prevailed in the past, traditions and precedents may guide and advise, but cannot restrict, progress.

Admiralty, as has been said, deals with matters arising "at sea." But what constitutes the sea, and what are its limits and bounds? Is the mouth of the Hudson or of the Mississippi a part of the sea? If so, how far up stream is "sea?" If not, how far out into the blue waters is "river?" Goods are laden on board ship in a foreign land to come to an American port, and they are to be protected for their owner by the admiralty (or district) court while they are at sea, and by the common

law (or State) court after they are brought ashore. But when do they cease to be "at sea?" Is it when the vessel enters the pilotage grounds of the port? or when she is fairly within the sheltered harbor? or when she is fast moored? or not until the goods are piled upon the solid wharf or pier?

EXTENSION TO ALL NAVIGABLE WATERS.

The leading test for determining these questions, in early English times, was the ebb and flow of the tide. There was a longcontinued and deep prejudice against the admiralty; and, as England had no important interior commerce, and the tidal line corresponded quite nearly with the actual wants and uses of her people in commercial matters, that line was easily made the dividing line between the rival courts, with the modification that admiralty should not interfere, tide or no tide, with matters occurring within the legal bounds of an English county. There is an antique caricature representing the petty disputes that in old times engrossed English tribunals on this subject by exhibiting a common-law lawyer, armed with a mace, running back and forth along the sea-side, defending his jurisdiction from the incursions of an admiralty lawyer who floats in a tub upon the water brandishing a trident. One can easily imagine that as the tide rises, the tub is borne in to high-water mark, and the jurisdiction of the admiralty lawyer is in the ascendant. As it falls, the common-law practitioner can push his competitor backwards with the receding waves, until he can flourish the mace over the entire moist beach above low water.

For two thirds of the century our courts followed, without much question, the view of admiralty which prevailed in England, and treated the word "admiralty" in the Constitution as meaning only that jurisdiction, limited to tide-waters, which was implied by it in old English law. There were no early reasons of importance impressing a different view. But, in later years, the increase of navigation and all allied interests upon the great