271 
 J66 
 
CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
ABOLISH THE FAHRENHEIT THERMOMETER 
 
 SPEECH 
 
 HON. ALBERT JOHNSON 
 
 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 
 
 DECEMBER 14, 1915 
 
 "Let us not sliift our burden needlessly, sluggishly, cravenly, onto 
 the shoulders of our successors ; they will have plenty of burdens of 
 their own. I.pt us profit by the opportunity to earn .high credit for 
 energy and progressive spirit ourselves and to stimulate our suc- 
 cessors by our example to earn similar credit in the many lines that will 
 still be open to them," 
 
 2080G— 14SG3 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 1010 
 
SPEECH 
 
 OF 
 
 B.01^. ALBEET JOHNSON, 
 
 OF WASHINGTON. 
 
 The House had under consideration the bill (H. B. 528) to discon- 
 tinue the use of the Falirenheit thermometer scale in Government pub- 
 lications, as follows : 
 
 " Be it enacted, etc.. That the centigrade scale of temperature 
 measurement shall be the standard in United States Government pub- 
 lications, the use of the Fahrenheit scale being discontinued, at the 
 option of heads of departments or other independent branches of the 
 Government, either immediately upon the siting of this bill or at 
 any time before January 1, 1920, except as provided in section 3. 
 
 " Shc. 2. During the period of transition the Fahrenheit equivalent 
 of centigrade degrees may be added In parentheses or as a footnote or 
 in any other way, if in the opinion of heads of departments or inde- 
 pendent officers it seems necessary. 
 
 " Sec. 3. The use of the Fahrenheit scale shall be permitted after 
 January 1, 1920, in cases where it is required by State or municipal 
 law, or in certificates of tests of instruments graduated in the Fahren- 
 heit scale." 
 
 Mr. JOHNSON of Washington. Mr. Speaker, on December G 
 I introduced House bill 528, providing for the discontinuance of 
 the Fahrenheit thermometer scale in Government publications. 
 My sympathy with this movement is hereditary, and in introduc- 
 ing the bill I felt that I was performing an act of piety to the mem- 
 ory of my fatlier. He was by compulsion of circumstances a 
 lawyer, by natural gifts and tastes a chemist, physicist, and in- 
 ventor. One of the things I remember most vividly is the im- 
 patience with which he often complained of the nuisance of 
 having to liandle two thermometric scales, one used by nearly 
 all scientists throughout the world, the other In popular use in 
 English-speaking countries, whereby he was perpetually com- 
 pelled to convert one into the other, with perpetual nerve irrita- 
 tion and loss of precious time. President Van Hise, of the 
 University of Wisconsin, ^^'rites me that, as a result of the 
 adoption of the centigrade scale by the American Institute of 
 20806—14863 3 
 
Electrical Engineers " an untold amount of time and labor has 
 been saved." In reading that phrase I thought I could almost 
 hear my father's voice. It is a profound satisfaction to me to 
 knov7 that if he were living now he would thank me for this bill. 
 The movement was started by an article by Dr. Robert Stein 
 in the Washington Post. I may add that much of the work in 
 connection with the bill has been done by Dr. Stein. 
 
 ABOLISH THE FAHRENHEIT THEttMOMBTEB, 
 
 By Eobert Stein. 
 fFrom tlie Washington Post, Oct. 17, 1915.], 
 
 One glance suffices to show the simplicity of the centigrade, the com' 
 plexity and clumsiness of the Fahrenheit thermometric scale. 
 
 Centigrade : Freezing point, 0° ; boiling point, 100°. 
 
 Fahrenheit: Freezing point, S2° ; boiling point, 212°. 
 
 The abolition of the Fahrenheit scale would be welcomed by scientists 
 the world over. The centigrade scale is used in all countries except the 
 United States and the British Empire. Even in these it is largely used 
 by scientists, who are thus compelled to thinli in two scales, and to 
 specify the scale by the letter C. or F. If you are told that the ther- 
 mometer at some foreign locality registered 40°, without C. or F., you 
 do not know whether the people wore Palm Beach suits or overcoats. 
 Many a scientist ruefully remembers precious hours which he had to 
 waste in trying to find out whether a given temperature was C. or "F. 
 If all temperatures were recorded in degrees C, the discomfort of doubt 
 would not exist. 
 
 Freezing point, the zero of the centigrade scale, is the natural zero 
 from which everybody consciously or unconsciously reckons. What is 
 meant by 40° F. or 22° F. or —4° F. 7 You do not know until you And 
 out how many degrees it is above or below freezing point. Thus — 
 40° F. means 8 degrees above freezing point (40 — 32). 
 22° F. means 10 degrees below freezing point (32 — 22). 
 
 — 4° P. means 36 degrees below freezing point (32 + 4). 
 
 Centigrade degrees require no calculation, because the figures them- 
 selves tell how many degrees they are above or below freezing point. 
 Thus — 
 
 22° C. means 22 degrees above freezing point. 
 
 —4° C. means 4 degrees below freezing point. 
 
 The Fahrenheit thermometer has remained in use simply because It 
 Is the oldest. It has a mere squatter's right. Constructed in 1720, and 
 being the only accurate thermometer then in existence, it was adopted 
 In England all the more readily because Gabriel Daniel Fahrenheit, a 
 native of Danzig, in Germany, long resident in Holland and England, 
 was a member of the Eoyal Society of London, in whose transactions 
 eome of his papers were published. He placed his zero at the lowest 
 temperature known to him, to wit, 32° below freezing point. 
 
 The first thermometer with zero at freezing point was constructed 
 In 1731 by Ren6 Antoine Ferehault de Rfiaumur, a native of La 
 Eochelle, in France, long resident in Paris. He called boiling point 80. 
 
 In 1742 the first centigrade thermometer was constructed by Anders 
 Celsius, professor of astronomy at Upsala University, Sweden, In most 
 countries the centigrade scale goes by the name of Celsius. 
 20806 — 14863 
 
Tho n^aumrtr was widely used till the French revolution, when, in the 
 beneficent movement to decimalize all standi rds, the Celsius was adopted 
 and officially called centigrade. The dominant Influence ot France at 
 the beginning of the nineteenth century rendered to the world the great 
 service of making the centigrade fashionable, with the result that the 
 Reaumur has gradually gone out of use, to the great relief of all worlters 
 who have to compare the temperature records of different countries. 
 The disappearance of tho Fahrenheit would be a still greater relief. 
 
 Fahrenheit's mistake in placing the zero not at freezing point, but 
 32" below it, has been perpetuated for 195 years simply because no- 
 body has taken the trouble to propose its discontinuance. It is ii 
 classic example of the incredible inertia of accomplished facts. Be- 
 cause tt German instrument maker in his shop at Amsterdam, on an 
 ill-starred day in 1720, wrote 32 opposite a certain mark when he should 
 have written 0, therefore 100,000,000 English-speaking people year after 
 year continue helplessly to call that mark 32 instead of 0, although 
 the right method has been used simultaneously since 1742, having 
 become international through the sheer force of its simplicitj-. Year 
 after year thousands of learned men, fuming with impatience, spend 
 valuable time in converting Fahrenheit into centigrade degrees and 
 vice versa, when there ought to be no need of conversion at all. Year 
 after year we have grumbled and growled and gi'oaned at the lethargy 
 which allowed the wrong system and the right system to continue side 
 by side,- and thus to create so much unnecessary labor, doubt, con- 
 fusion, and vexation ; year after year we have wondered why somebody 
 did not move that the wrong system be dropped ; year after year every 
 one of us has waited for somebody else to make the move. " Habit is 
 an iron shirt " says tlie German proverb. 
 
 This long-delayed reform presents less difficulty than most reforms, 
 because most of the people who deal in temperatures are already familiar 
 with the centigrade and prefer it. "If Newton's law of gravitation 
 conflicted with vested interests," says Macaulay, " it would not be 
 accepted yet." Happily in the present case no important vested interests 
 are involved. At very little expense the Fahrenheit scale on each ther- 
 mometer could be replaced by the centigrade scale. 
 
 The Weather Bureau, the great source of temperature data, can not 
 make the change without congressional sanction. If that bureau were' 
 authoriz.^d to use the centigi-ade, the public would acquire the new 
 habit almost instantly and without effort, and would welcome the relief 
 afforded by its simplicity just as they welcomed the slmpUcity of 
 standard time. The only landmark they would have to fix in their 
 minds would be normal blood heat, about 98.0° F., which would there- 
 after be called 37° C. As an air temperature tliis represents the sum- 
 mer maximum, which, fortunately, is not often exceeded in the United 
 States. 
 
 Before introducing the bill I tliouglit it best to submit it for 
 criticism to 'some 200 scientists. Of the replies received to date 
 131 were f!ivor:ible, 7 unfavorable. Extracts from the letters 
 are appended. The necessity of concentration compels me, to 
 uiy keen regret, to forego tlie pleasure of publisliing these inter- 
 esting letters in full, but I hcipe that an opportunity for so doing 
 may present itself later on. The extracts contain the answers 
 to the objections that have been raised. 
 20806— 118G3 
 
6 
 
 Many correspondents, as might be expected, take occasion to 
 advocate the substitution of the metric system for our tradi- 
 tional weights and measures, while others deprecate any attempt 
 to make the centigrade scale a yokefellow to the metric system. 
 With the latter view I thoroughly agree. The metric system and 
 the centigrade scale are two totally different subjects, and the 
 attempt to yoke them together would merely create confusion. 
 The essential advantage of the metric system lies In this, that it 
 enables multiplication and division to be performed by the mere 
 moving of the decimal point. This has nothing to do with the 
 centigrade scale, because there is no occasion to multiply a::id 
 very little occasion to divide degrees of temperature. Con- 
 versely, the essential advantage of the centigrade scale lies not 
 in the division of the thermometric base into 100 degrees but in 
 placing the zero at freezing point. This evidently has nothing 
 ■ to do with the metric system. Everybody will admit that the 
 inconvenience attending the general introduction of the centi- 
 grade scale would be trifling compared with the inconvenience 
 involved in the general introduction of the metric system. A 
 mouse can enter where an elephant can not ; but if the mouse is 
 tied to the elephant, you can easily see what will happen. 
 
 It has been suggested that four years is too short a time In 
 which to make the change. If scientific men share this view, I 
 shall, of course, be glad to accept an amendment lengthening the 
 period to 8 or even 10 years. 
 
 EKSOLnTIOKS. 
 BOTANICAL SOCIETY OP WASHINGTON, D. C, NOVEMBER 2, 1916. 
 
 Whereas tlie Botanical Society of Washington recognizes the confu- 
 sion, inconvenience, and loss of time an! efBclency occasioned by the 
 lack of uniformity in recording temperatures in this country ; and 
 Whereas the centigrade scale is much simpler and more convenient than 
 the Fahrenheit scale and is the present standard in all other coun- 
 tries except Great Britain, and is also in general use among scientific 
 men throughout the world : Therefore be It 
 , Resolved, That this society expresses itsi hearty approval of the 
 efforts being made to obtain legislation requiring the use of the centi- 
 grade scale in all future Government publications. 
 
 BESEAECH CLUB OF THE DNIVEKSITT OP MICHIGAN, HOVEMBEB 17, 1915. 
 
 I secured the adoption of a resolution favoring the bill by the Re- 
 search Club of the University. (TT. B. PillsbUry.) 
 20806 — 14863 
 
POARD OF DIRECTOnS AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETYj DECEMBER 11, 1916. 
 
 Resolved, That the aircctors of the American Chemical Society are 
 unanimously in favor of the bill presented by Hon. Albert Johnson 
 for the adoption of the centigrade scale of temperature measurement in 
 Lnited States Government publicaticn.s, with the understanding that 
 for such time as may be deemed necessary the Fahrenheit scale may 
 follow in parentheses where the various bureaus deem such inclusion 
 wise. 
 
 AMERICAN ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY, DECEMBER 13, 1015. 
 
 At a meeting of the American Entomological Society, held December 
 13, 1915, H. R. 528, a bill to discontinue the use of the Fahrenheit 
 thermometer scale in Government publications, was fully indorsed. 
 (Henry Skinner, recording secretary.) 
 
 IIOCHESTEB ACADEMY OP SCIENCE, DECEMBER 13, 1015. 
 
 In the opinion of the Rochester Academy of Science, your bill per- 
 mitting the use of the centigrade thermometer in the various depart- 
 ments of the United States Government is a. desirable measure, and 
 deserves our indorsement. The academy does not favor forcing it upon 
 any department or bureau. (George H. Chadmck, secretary.) 
 
 EXTRACTS. 
 
 I wish to express my most hearty approval and to say that it this 
 bill passes the result will be a decided increase in the eflQciency of 
 everyone who has to do with temperature measurements. It is hard 
 to estimate the time which would be saved in the long run by all users 
 of the present double system, but it would certainly be very great. 
 I wish to assure you of the most vigorous support of myself and of 
 all my colleagues, as well as of the American Institute of Electrical 
 Engineers, which body lias done its best to support the gospel of the 
 decimal system. (Comfort A. Adams, professor of electrical engineer- 
 ing. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 
 I believe the change would be a good one. (Chester Allen, assistant 
 and field organizer, extension division. University of Wisconsin, Madi- 
 son, Wis.) 
 
 I heartily favor the change from the Fahrenheit to the centigrade 
 scale and am glad to indorse any measure to that end. 1 believe, how- 
 ever, that the change will naturally be a scmewhat gradual one, and 
 that for the present it would be unwise to rely solely on the centigrade 
 scale In certain classes of Government publications. Many of these 
 publications are intended for popular consumption — for farmers and 
 persons who are accustomed to thinlcing in terms of the Fahrenheit 
 scale. Some of our practical directions to farmers include the item of 
 temperature. In that class of publications I thinlt it would be pref- 
 erable to state the temperature according io both scales. This would 
 perhaps be allowable uuder the proposed legislation, the Fahrenheit 
 denomination being given in parentheses after the centigrade. (B. TF. 
 Allen, Chief Office of Experiment Stations, Department of Agriculture, 
 Washington, D. C.) 
 
 The proposed change commends itself on the ground o( economy and 
 efficiency in all nspccts of Government wui'k that touch upon scientific 
 or permanently valuable contributions. The change has to come, and 
 the sooner the better for the credit of all concerned. (E. A. Andrews, 
 professor of zoology, Johns Hopkins University, lialtiraore.) 
 
 Any well-educated person having at heart the progi'ess of this coun- 
 try must join you In the desire of having the Fahrenheit scale of tejii- 
 perature abolished. (Henryk Aretoioski, chief of science division, New 
 York rublic Library ; physicist to Belgian antarctic cjpedition.) 
 2080G— 14SG3 
 
8 
 
 I am heartily In favor of this law. (Bion J. Arnold, electrical en- 
 gineer, chief subway engineer, city of Chicago, 105 South La Salle 
 Street,' Chicago.) 
 
 I approve the proposed law, in case the change is desired at this 
 time by the officers of the Weather Bureau. (S. /. Bailey, Phillips pro- 
 fessor of astronomy. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass. 
 
 I think most emphatically that it is time the Government in its 
 publications should rise to international scientific standards, and you 
 will have the cordial support of the great body of scientiflc men. If 
 our forefathers had not had some initiative we would still be using 
 the clumsy English monetary system in place of our decimal system. 
 It is a pity that they did not go farther while they were about it and 
 change the system of weights and measures. Doubtless the only reason 
 they did not do so was because, at that time, such problems were not 
 regarded as within the jurisdiction of the Federal Government. (Joseph 
 Barren, professor of structural geology, Yale University, New Haven, 
 Conn.) 
 
 It does seem to me that it wouid be a step in advance in our scien- 
 tiflc and commercial relations with Latin America if the United States 
 could generally adopt the centigrade system. The only suggestion I 
 can make is that of the parallel use of the Fahrenheit with the centi- 
 grade scale until the latter could be generally understood and approved. 
 (John Barrett, director general, Pan-American Union, Washington, 
 D. C.) 
 
 It would seem desirable to make this change. (Albert L. Barrows, 
 professor of zoology. University of California, Berkeley, Cai.) 
 
 This Is a step in the right direction, and we are strongly in favor 
 of it. In the steel business it is especially desirable to have but one 
 scale, as in recent years a large proportion of the steel plants have 
 had to go quite thoroughly into the question of heat treatment, and a 
 great deal of research work has been done in different countries, em- 
 ploying both the centigrade and Fahrenheit scales. This has ,not only 
 Introduced confusion, but makes it often necessary to translate one into 
 the other. (G. Bartol, president. The Otis Steel Co., Cleveland, Ohio.) 
 
 The centigrade scale is now used in all specifications for electrical 
 apparatus and in most scientiflc publications. Its use in Government 
 publications will go far toward securing its general adoption, which 
 is so highly desirable. (Philip P. Barton, vice president and general 
 manager Niagara Falls Power Co., Niagara Falls, N. y.) 
 
 The project should not need much urging since it involves rela- 
 tively little inconvenience arid expense. That it would be of great 
 advantage to bring the temperature scale of the people into con- 
 formity with that used by practical scientists, without exception, 
 throughout the world, seems to me obvious. (Carl Barus, professor of 
 physics. Brown University, Providence, R. I.) 
 
 I should heartily favor the abolition of the Fahrenheit thermometer. 
 Of course it is already abolished in all chemical and physical labora- 
 tories. (George P. Becker, Chief, Division of Physical and Chemical 
 Research, United States Geological Survey, Washington, D. C. First 
 approval received Oct. 20, 1915.) 
 
 I am heartily in sympathy with the bill. It may be of interest to 
 you to know that the following committees, of wnich I am a member, 
 have adopted the centigrade scale : 
 
 First. Special committee on " materials for road construction and 
 standards tor their test and use," American Society of Civil Engineers. 
 2080G — 14863 
 
9 
 
 Second. Subcommiltee on " standard tests for nonbitumlnoiis road 
 materials," American Society lor Testing Materials. 
 
 Third. Committee on ' standard speclflcations for gi-avcl and broken- 
 stone roads," American Society of Municipal Improvement-!. (Arthur 
 H, Blanehardj C. E., professor of highway engineering, Columbia Tlni- 
 Tersity ; secretary of committee 1, chairman of committees 2 and 3.) 
 
 It would be a very great convenience, because it would establish 
 uniformity with the best usage regarding measurements of temperature. 
 It is only due to lack of initiative and to the weight of habit that the 
 Fahrenheit scale still continues in use. The objection that Ik made 
 to the general introduction of the metric system, namely, that it would 
 require a complete readjustment of machinery, does not hold in the 
 present case. In fact, if the Weather Bureau would introduce the 
 centigrade scale, it would at once be adopted without any difficulty. 
 (^Franz Boas, professor of anthropology, Columbia University ; curator, 
 department of anthropology, American Museum of Natural History, 
 New York.) 
 
 I am heartily in favor of the general use of the centigrade. Scientists 
 the world over use the centigrade scale only, as it is much simpler and 
 more rational than the Fahrenheit. (Marsion T. Bogert, professor of 
 organic chemistry, Columbia University, New York.) 
 
 The bill meets our approval. The Fahrenheit scale is an illogical 
 one ; there is no reason for using 32" as freezing point and 212° as 
 boiling point. The centigrade is used exclusively by scientists, and is 
 the one in commercial use in practically all civilized countries except 
 the English-speaking ones. It might be necessary to make an exception 
 of the publications of the Weather Bureau until people at large have 
 been educated in the use of the centigrade scale along with the Fahren- 
 heit. {James E, Boyd, professor of mechanics ; W. H. Minor, assistant 
 professor of mine engineering ; D. J. Demonet, professor of metallurgy ; 
 IJ. E. Semcnneier, professor of metallurgy ; Ohio State University, 
 Columbus, Ohio.) 
 
 Like 09 out of 100 scientific men, I am heartily in favor of a change 
 from the Fahrenheit to the centigrade scale of temperature measure- 
 ment. Such a change means not only a step toward uniformity in 
 scientific measurements, but an actual saving of labor and confusion. 
 Scientific measurements and physical values and constants are more 
 than ever of world-wide interest and should be expressed in terms which 
 are intelligible anywhere in the world. (A. C. Boulston, chemist, 
 Malllnckrodt Chemical Works, St. Louis, Mo.) 
 
 I have long been in accord with the tendency to standardize not only 
 thermometers but other instruments, indeed, everything tliat could be 
 standardized, so as to eliminate the trouble in these modern times of 
 having to translate one weight, measure, or coin into the various types 
 that we have in this good country of ours. 
 
 Let me illustrate. When we receive an order from the splendid Bu- 
 reau of Standards — to the director of which, and Ms assistants, all 
 honor — it comes to us in the metric system; it is the same from the 
 Coast and Geodetic Survey ; the same from the Smithsonian Instilulidu ; 
 and, it I remember rightly, the same from the Weather Bureau. When, 
 however, these orders come to us from the various arsenals of the Army, 
 West Point Military Academy, United States Navy or War Department, 
 Ihey come to us in English measures. 
 
 The writer api^eared before the Couimitteo on Coinage, W<'ights, and 
 Measures on February 6, 1002. The report of my examination, on page 
 2080G— 14S03 
 
10 
 
 84 of the records of that date, will give you my opinion of the centi- 
 grade system, for it is based on the proper kind of standard, viz, the 
 freezing and boiling points of water. Some systems, particularly the 
 Fahrenheit, are about as sensible as the old colored man who said he 
 had no business to buy a barometer, for did not the Lord give him the 
 rheumatism to tell what kind of weather to predict? {John A. BrOr- 
 shear, chairman John A. Brashear Co. (Ltd.), astronomical and physical 
 instruments, Pittsburgh, Pa.) 
 
 I wholly approve the substitution of the centigrade scale for the 
 Fahrenheit. It is more logical to divide the scale Into 100 degrees 
 than into 180 plus 32 degrees, a very cumbersome method. (N. L, 
 Britton, director New York Botanical Garden.) 
 
 To fix an early date tor the use of the centigrade scale in Govern- 
 ment publi ations may hasten the needed revision of textbooks in ele- 
 mentary, secondary, and higher education, and thereby lessen the con- 
 fusion which is more or less inevitable in a change of habits. (Edward 
 F. Buchner, professor of philosophy and education, Johns Hopkins Uni- 
 versity, Baltimore.) 
 
 I share with most scientific men a strong prejudice in favor of the 
 centigrade. I am doubtful, however, whether it would be wise to ex- 
 clude the Fahrenheit altogether, for example from the weather reports. 
 1 should think it might be better for some years to give the tempera- 
 ture in both scales as a transition measure to familiarize the people with 
 the centigrade scale. (H. A. Bumstead, professor of physics, director 
 Sloane Laboratory of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.) 
 
 The centigrade scale is now used in all scientific work and is in more 
 general use throughout the world than the Fahrenheit scale. It seems 
 an opportune moment to make the change, when we are trying to get 
 into closer commercial touch with all the Latin-American countries. 
 (Alfred E. BurtoUj dean Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Bos- 
 ton, Mass.) 
 
 Every laboratory guide for students, every reference text, and prac- 
 tically every book dealing with any of" the chemical, physical, or bio- 
 logical sciences must be cluttered up with tables for conversion from 
 one thermometer scale to another. To clear up our Government pub- 
 lications will go a long way toward establishing the system in all 
 publications issued in this country ; it will enable a German or French 
 scientist to read our work without annoyance. (Joseph S. Caldwell, 
 professor of botany, Alabama Polytechnic Institute and Agricultural 
 Experiment Station, Auburn, Ala.) 
 
 The centigrade is easier to learn, easier to use. If the school children 
 were taught the centigrade scale they would find it easier than the 
 Fahrenheit. (Otis W. Caldwell, professor of botany. University of 
 Chicago.) 
 
 I am in favor of the centigrade scale chiefly because it Is more exten- 
 sively used and therefore more international and more convenient. 
 (Philip P. Calvert, professor of zoology, University of Pennsylvania, 
 Philadelphia, Pa.) 
 
 I am pleased to have an opportunity to advocate the use of the centi- 
 grade scale. The Fahrenheit scale is an unnatural one. It merely 
 " happened " that Fahrenheit called the boiling point 212°. He might 
 just as well have called it 170° or 269°. He called " zero " the lowest 
 temperature he could obtain from the mixture of ice and salt. This 
 may mean something to the maker of ice cream, but the operation of 
 mixing ice and salt means essentially nothing to anybody else in the 
 20806—14863 
 
11 
 
 present day. Having fixed Ms " boiling point " at 212° and his Ice-and- 
 salt temperature at " zero," the freezing point fell at 32°. The freezing 
 temperature is something -which the people in general fully comprehend 
 and men of science have to deal with very frequently in their labora- 
 tories. It is a perfectly definite thing in all occupations and in all 
 countries. It is a natural starting point and it ought to be called 
 " zero," as It is in the centigrade scale. 
 
 The interval of 180° between freezing and boiling in the Fahrenheit 
 scale makes the unit of 1* too small. The general public does not ap- 
 preciate the difference between temperatures 56° and 54° nor between 
 temperatures 47° and 45° nor between temperatures 170° and 165°. 
 The larger units of the centigrade scale are abundantly small for scien- 
 tific purposes and for the events of daily life. 
 
 In great sections of our country, and in the greater number and more 
 populous of our colonies, the people have no conception of what the 
 temperature —4° Fahrenheit means. They do not know what ''zero" 
 temperature stands for. If they are interested and able to translate it 
 into words, they invariably compute how many degrees It is below freez- 
 ing. If the centigrade scale were In use they would know immediately 
 that it is 20° below freezing, and that would mean something to them. 
 
 Science knows no land and sea boundaries, and consequently men of 
 science prefer to use the centigrade scale, which is universally used in 
 the great majority of countries. The centigrade system is a scientific 
 system. The Fahrenheit system is arbitrary and unscientific and the 
 country which uses it Is to that extent behind the times. <T7. W. 
 Campbell, director Lick Observatory of the University of California, 
 Mount Hamilton, Cal.) 
 
 If this bill becomes law it will merely permit the scientists In the 
 Government service to follow the practice in universal use by all other 
 scientists in English-speaking countries and by the rest of the world. 
 There is no argument in favor of the Fahrenheit scale except the tradi- 
 tion of long-established use. The simplicity and logic of the centigrade 
 system are so cogent that this system is used wherever antiquated 
 statutes do not debar It. (A. J, Carlson, professor of physiology. Uni- 
 versity of Chicago.) 
 
 I consider It as one of the symptoms of our American backwardness 
 and submission to tradition that we have not long ago introduced the 
 centigrade thermometer. (Paul Cams, editor Open Court, Chicago.) 
 
 I favor the adoption of the centigrade scale. (T. C. Ohamberlin, 
 head of department of geology. University of Chicago ; director. Walker 
 Museum.) 
 
 la scientific work the centigrade scale Is used almost exclusively, both 
 in England and in this country. In chemistry and physics one rarely 
 sees any other scale employed. It would undoubtedly be a very good 
 thing if the centigrade could be substituted for the Fahrenheit. {F. W. 
 Clarke, chief chemist, U. S. Geological Survey, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 I am heartily in favor of the bill. (1*. P. Claxton, commissioner of 
 education, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 Such a bill would be not only wise but timely. All scientific men use 
 only the centigrade scale in everything. I myself do not know the tem- 
 perature nowadays In Fahrenheit terms. The Fuhrenholt scale has 
 been abandoned by the entire world, practically, with the exception 
 of the United States and England. It has no scientific merit what- 
 ever and would be cumbersome were it not that it is absolutely ignored 
 in scientific work. {Charles B. Coatea, dean, Audubon Sugar School, 
 Louisiana State University, Baton Kouge, La.) 
 20806— 148G3 . 
 
12 
 
 I should be very glad to see the centigrade used in all scientific pubr 
 lications, including those of the Government. (A. D. Cole, head, de- 
 partment of physics, State University, Columbus, Ohio.) 
 
 It is commendable that the Government is taking such a progressive 
 step. (William Coleman, professor of physics, Howard University, 
 Washington, D. C.) 
 
 I thoroughly approve the bill. Uniformity of practice and of stand- 
 ards are desirable from every point of view, and we should at the 
 earliest possible moment bring our practice into conformity with that 
 of the majority of civilized people. {George G. Comsfock, director, 
 Washburn Observatory, University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.) 
 
 Probably no scientific man would hesitate to register his approval. 
 Since all our scientific publications have made the change long ago, this 
 action would simply make the Government scientific publications con- 
 sistent with general scientific practice. (John M. Coulter, professor of 
 botany. University of Chicago.) 
 
 I am heartily in favor of the bill. (S. A. Courtis, supervisor of edu- 
 cational research, Detroit public schools ; consulting director, depart- 
 ment of measurement, eflSciency, and standardization, school of educa- 
 tion. University of Oklahoma ; secretary of section L (education) , Ameri- 
 can Association for the Advancement of Science.) 
 
 I am in entire sympathy with your proposed legislation. (F. V. 
 Coville, botanist in charge. Bureau of Plant Industry, Department of 
 Agriculture, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 In common with practically all scientific workers, I have long adopted 
 and consistently used the centigrade scale. Its advantages are so obvi- 
 ous that they hardly need mentioning, but it may be worth while to 
 emphasize specially the fact that the cardinal points of the scale, 
 namely, zero and 100°, are far more convenient for use, as is its decimal 
 arrangement, than is the Fahrenheit scale. The fact that the centigrade 
 is used by scientists in all countries and has been adopted by almost all 
 the leading Governments of the world is a tremendous argument in its 
 favor. (Henry C. Cowles, associate professor of botany. University of 
 Chicago.) 
 
 On general principles, or because I favor whatever makes for sim- 
 plicity and uniformity and economy of time and labor, I approve the 
 proposed change. I recognize, however, the almost insuperable diflicul- 
 ties to be overcome. (W. O. Crosby, professor of geology, Massachu- 
 setts Institute of Technology, Boston.) 
 
 The centigrade system is more convenient and in every way better 
 than the others. If people only knew the system, they would want it.- 
 A campaign of education is all that is needed to make the change. Any 
 authoritative public use of the system will help to introduce it. (Vlric 
 Dahlgren, professor of biology, Princeton University, New Jersey.) 
 
 The change will be most enthusiastically received by all of us who are 
 concerned with scientific matters, since the centigrade scale is the only 
 convenient and logical one. The public is to a considerable extent 
 accustomed to it now, and would find no difiiculty in its use by the 
 Government. (Edward S. Dana, professor of physics, Yale University, 
 New Haven, Conn.) 
 
 I am glad to give a statement of reasons for abolishing the 
 Fahrenheit scale. 
 
 The prlncip.T.1 reason is that the majority of the civilized nations of 
 the world have abandoned all scales for the centigrade, and it is very 
 desirable that there shall be uniformity in this respect throughout 
 20800—14863 
 
13 
 
 the civilized world. The fact that so many nations have united on the 
 centigrade scale is an a priori reason for thinking there must be some 
 advantage for it over other scales. 
 
 The zero point af the centigrade scale is something important, 
 namely, the freezing of water, which every farmer and householder 
 recognizes as a very critical temperature, while 100° is the point of 
 boiling of water, which for every housewife is a very critical tem- 
 perature. By the Fahrenheit scale there are about a hundred degi'eos 
 experienced in our latitude, whereas by the centigrade there are only 
 some 55. Every unit of the centigrade scale, therefore, becomes im- 
 portant and easily remembered, while the units in the Fahrenheit 
 scale are too numerous to bald readily in the mind. Thus by the 
 centigrade 0° Is freezing, 5° Is cold, 10° is low temperature, 1.5° is 
 high temperature, 20° is the normal temperature for rooms, at be- 
 tween 20° and 25° we begin to divest ourselves of the standard cloth- 
 ing, piece by iJiece, 30° is already very warm, 35° is hot, and 37° is the 
 temperature of the blood, while 40° is rarely reached in this latitude 
 and constitutes a point of great danger to life. 
 
 The objection is sometimes made that there are too many occasions 
 to use minus temperatures with the centigi'ade scale ; but in view of 
 the fact that in parts o£ our country temperatures of —30° and 
 — 35° Fahrenheit arc common, it is clear that the Fahrenheit scale 
 does not relieve us of these minus signs. In the centigrade scale, 
 however, minus means something definite, to wit, the degree of freez- 
 ing that the water in the lakes and in the ground is undergoing. As 
 in the degrees above zero, so in the minus degrees, one of the centi- " 
 grade degrees indicates a readily appreciable grade of increasing dan- 
 ger of freezing and ot discomfort. 
 
 If it be urged that the finer division of the Fahrenheit scale is 
 necessary for some purposes, this will be readily answered by saying 
 that in both scales the unit is wholly inadequate for scientifle pur- 
 poses, for which purposes those units are divided into tenths and. 
 hundredths and even thousandths for greater precision, and that in 
 scientific work, where great precision is required, the Fahrenheit 
 scale has gone out of use altogether. 
 
 To learn a new system of thermometrio division will be no greater 
 inconvenience than changing from locai to stand-ird time. After the 
 lapse of a tew years no one for a moment would consider returning to 
 the antiquated system. 
 
 Naturally the makers of Fahrenheit Instruments do not wish to 
 junk their old stock, but here again the inconvenience will be only 
 temporary and more than overbalanced by the opportunity that ther- 
 mometer makers will have to concentrate their attention on a single 
 scale. (Oharles B. Dacenport, director, Station for Experimental Evo- 
 lution, of the Carnegie Institution of Washingtou (Cold Spring Mar- 
 bor, Long Island, N. Y.).) 
 
 Scientists the world over, so tar as I know, are using the centigrade 
 thermometer. Eefore any chan.ge is made, the recommendation of the 
 men in the scientific bureaus would be exceedingly valuable. (A»- 
 Ijcne Davenport, dean and director, College of Agriculture and Agricul- 
 tural E.'cpcriment Station, University of Illinois, Urbana, 111.) 
 
 The object of the bill has my unqualified approval and I am of opin- 
 ion that the best Interests of the Government and the people will be 
 subserved by adopting the centigrade scale. (Arthur P. Davis, Director 
 and Chief Engineer, U. S. Eeclamation Service, 'Washington, D. C.) 
 2080C— 148C3 
 
14 
 
 There Is everything to be said in favor of this change for Its sim- 
 plicity and common sense, and I can not conceive any serious diffi- 
 culties in the way of its adoption. (Bradley M. Davis, professor of 
 botany, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.) 
 
 I have not the slightest hesitation in indorsing a project for the sub- 
 stitution of the centigrade thermometer scale In place of the Fahrenheit 
 scale. This has been regularly done in all the scientific publications of 
 this laboratory since its foundation in 1904, and all our records are in 
 terms of centigrade degrees. The literature of the subjects in geo- 
 physics with which we work records temperatures, almost without ex- 
 ception, in terms of the centigrade scale. Even the thermometers about 
 the laboratory for recording room temperature have long since been 
 changed to centigrade degrees in order to spare us even this minor 
 inconvenience of changing to an awkward scale for this everyday pur- 
 pose. (Arthur L. Day, Director Geophysical Laboratory, Carnegie In- 
 stitutioD of Washington.) 
 
 The centigrade scale is much simpler and so much easier to use in 
 calculations that it would save a large amount of valuable time to 
 many of the public servants. ( J. S. Diller, geologist, U. S. Geological 
 Survey, Washington. D. C.) 
 
 I should certainly favor this bill. (Richard E. Dodge, professor of 
 geography. Teachers' College, Columbia University, New Yorlj.) 
 
 It would assist the advancement of scientific worls in the United 
 
 States. All worliers in pure science, and many engaged in the solution 
 
 of technical problems, use the centigrade scale and would welcome its 
 
 ■ official recognition. (Henry H. Donaldson, professor of neurology, 
 
 Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology, Philadelphia.) 
 
 Speaking for several of my coworkers as well as for myself, I can say 
 that the centigrade scale is certainly the one to be used. Its advan- 
 tages and logic are so well known as to call for no comment. The fact 
 that scientists the world oyer have found the centigrade scale the most 
 convenient, speaks for itself. (A. Eichhorn, Chief Division of Pathol- 
 ogy, Bureau of Animal Industry, Department of Agriculture, Washing- 
 ton, D. C.) 
 
 Theoretically the Fahrenheit thermometer scale should be banished 
 from civilization. As to the best practical way of doing this there is 
 ground for discussion. I see no reason personally why the drst step 
 should not be taken by the Government, but I do not pose as an au- 
 thority on these matters, and I believe that such questions should be 
 settled by authorities rather than by popular vote. The majority of 
 the public give to such matters only inadequate consideration. (David 
 Fairchild, Agricultural Explorer in charge' Foreign Seed and Plant 
 Introduction, Bureau of Plant Industry, Department of Agriculture, 
 Washington, D. C.) 
 
 Count me in favor of the bill to secure use of the centigrade scale and 
 any other radical changes. (H. L. Fairchild, professor of geology. Uni- 
 versity of Rochester.) 
 
 I can unhesitatingly and without reservation indorse the move. The 
 centigrade scale is rational and satisfactory ; the Fahrenheit scale is 
 irrational nonsense and a nuisance. 
 
 I would suggest that a move be started at once to induce the Canadian 
 Government to " follow suit," so that this whole continent may be on 
 one scale. The Commission of Conservation might perhaps be Induced 
 to take an interest in conserving the energy wasted in computations 
 from one scale to the other. (jB. B. Fernow, dean, faculty of forestry,. 
 University of Toronto, Canada.) 
 20806 — 14863 
 
15 
 
 The Fahrenheit has no natural zero ; the centigrade has, ana divides 
 the interval between and boiling point by a round 100. There is a 
 great advantage in using the same scale as is used abroad, and the cen- 
 tigrade is now almost universal. In fact. It Is already largely in use in 
 the United States. (Irving Fisher, professor of political economy, Yale 
 University, New Haven, Conn.) 
 
 I referred the matter to Mr. W. K. Metz, superintendent of building.-?, 
 who reports as follows : " The centigrade scale of temperature is used 
 to-day in all scientific worlt, and the use of the two different thermome- 
 ters very often causes confusion. If the period of transition is made 
 long enough, no hardship will result." (.Oorneliue Fori, Public Printer, 
 Washington, D. C.) 
 
 A law malting the use of the centigrade mandatory is highly desirable. 
 Having used the centigrade thermometer for my scientific worli for the 
 last 40 years and for my room temperatures for the last 10 years, I can 
 see no possible objection to its use and the great advantage of a natural, 
 logical system. I trust that you may succeed in introducing simplicity 
 where now reigns complexity without a single point in its favor. (8. H. 
 Qage, professor of histology and embryology (emeritus), Cornell Uni- 
 versity, Ithaca, N. y.) 
 
 I am pleased with the revised draft of the thermometer bill. I would 
 suggest a further amendment, however, by substituting the words " heads 
 of departments and other independent branches of the Government " for 
 the words " chiefs of bureaus." There should be some sort of uni- 
 formity in each department. In the Department of Agriculture, for 
 example, where there are 12 or 14 bureau chiefs, it would bo very im- 
 portant that its publications should have some uniformity. The way 
 to accomplish this would be to place the power in the heads of the 
 departments rather than in the- bureau chiefs. {Beverly T. Oalloway, 
 dean, New Yorli State College of Agriculture, Cornell University ; former 
 Chief, Bureau of Plant Industry, and Assistant Secretary, Department 
 of Agriculture, Washington. D. C.) 
 
 I should heartily approve such a move as leading to a simpler stand- 
 ard which is used in most sciences and in many countries. {Frederick 
 P. day, professor of pathology, University of California, Berl<eley, Cal. ) 
 
 I have always favored the introduction of the centigrade for all 
 uses, but realize that it will be somewhat difficult matter to accom- 
 plish this for popular use. However, if it is to be done, a start must 
 be made, and I Imow of no better -way to do it than to have the dox- 
 ernment take the initiative. {George Oibls, chief engineer, Electric 
 Traction & Station Construction, Pennsylvania Tuunel & Kailway Co., 
 Pennsylvania Station, New York.) 
 
 The i)ropoHal to substitute the centlgracio scale for the Fahrenheit 
 is a proposal to Incur temporary inconvenience for tlie sake of porniauent 
 convenience. The change must surely come, and the practi'-^al nuestiou 
 for the community is' whether this generation shall incur the incon- 
 venience or leave that sacrifice for a future generation. 
 
 The changf of thermometer scales Is a compar.atively trivial matter. 
 Very many of the instruments in use are already furnished with both 
 scales. The important cost to the community is in mental effort — tlio 
 learning to think in the terms of a new scale. 
 
 I believe the best mode of initiating the reform is the one propnseil 
 in your lelte-r — to make Government publications an object li^sson ft^r 
 the people; and the only practicable way to accomplish tliat is '.)y act of 
 Congi'ess. 
 
 20S0C — 148G3 
 
16 
 
 The cost to the Government would not be Inconsiderable.' Instruments 
 and forms of the Weather Bureau would require change. The new 
 notation for a time would have to be Interpreted in terms of the old, 
 and in other ways the popular text.=! would have to be expanded. There 
 ■would be the same difliculty in combining old and new American tem- 
 perature records that is now found in combining American records with 
 foreign ; and some of om- bureaus, the Weather Bureau especially, would 
 be subjected to the censure or ridicule which conservatism is prone to 
 bestow on rational reforms. The cost, however, would all be incurred 
 in a few years, and, in my judgment, the effort and money would bo 
 well expended. (G. K. Gilbert, geologist, U. S. Geological Survey, Wash- 
 ington, D. C.) > 
 
 I have a copy of the revised draft of a bill to abolish the Fahrenheit 
 thermometer and will bring it to the attention of the American Society 
 of Zoologists at its annual meeting in Columbus, December 28-31, and 
 will recommend the adoption of a resolution favoring the enactment of 
 the bill. {Caswell Grave, professor of zoology, Johns Hoplcins Univer- 
 sity, Baltimore, secretary American Society of Zoologists.) 
 
 The plan has the peculiar merit that it is not of a nature to arouse 
 any organized opposition ; even those who are constitutionally op- 
 posed to innovation will not care enough about the movement to take 
 active steps against it. (iS. R. Giirley, M. D., 542 East Seventy-ninth 
 Street, New York.) 
 
 I heartily approve of the proposition. (Thomas H. Haines, M. D„ 
 clinical director. Bureau of Juvenile Kesearch, Columbus, Ohio.) 
 
 This bill has my hearty approval. (Percival Hall, president Columbia 
 Institution for the Deaf, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 I am in hearty accord with your bill. (Paul H. Hanus, professor of 
 education. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 
 I think it ought to be done. In the case of the weather reports the 
 plan would suffer by irritating the reader, unless the Fahrenheit 
 temperature were given along with the centigrade. Eventually that 
 duplication could be discontinued. (D. W. Hering, professor of physics. 
 New York "University.) 
 
 I beg to express my full sympathy with the proposed measure, for it 
 would free us from the unfortunate double standard due to the use of 
 the Fahrenheit scale in certain Government publications, whereas in all 
 the scientific work, not only of the Government but of all the body of 
 scientific workers throughout the country, the centigrade scale is used. 
 
 The illogical basis of the Fahrenheit scale, with its arbitrary number 
 of degrees between the freezing point and the boiling point of water, 
 makes it a matter of wonder why this standard has so long persisted 
 in comparison with the very logical and simple centigrade system,. 
 
 I talked recently with the representative of a large firm which manu- 
 factures thermometers. He told me that such a change would be wel- 
 comed by them and would cause but slight disturbance in their manu- 
 facturing operations, and that indeed these operations would be so 
 greatly simplified in the future that they would gladly put up with the 
 slight trouble of changing the stocks now in hand. (Charles H. Herty, 
 professor of chemistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, 
 N. C. ; president American Chemical Society.) 
 
 Men of science everywhere use the centigrade scale, as does the 
 
 Bureau of Standards, with which I am connected. Probably the most 
 
 effective agency of the Government in familiarizing the general public 
 
 with the centigrade scale would be the daily bulletins of the Weather 
 
 20806 — 14863 
 
17 
 
 Bnreau. From the moment of adoption of the resolution by Congress 
 those bulletins might show temperatures In both centigrade and Fahren- 
 heit degrees, coupled with the announcement that after a given date 
 only the centigrade would be used. 
 
 Every move that tends toward simplification of our processes of 
 measurement and computation Is to be welcomed as a step forward. 
 The temporary inconvenience that attends a transition period should 
 count as nothing against the incalculable gain in time and saving of 
 mental energy to future generations. iW. F. Hillehrand, chief chemist, 
 Bureau of Standards, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 It seems to me that the trifling inconvenience to which people would 
 be subjected for a few weeks or months until they had become familiar 
 with the centigrade scale should not count against the Immeasurably 
 greater permanent convenience of using the same scale as every other 
 country except England, and the scale used universally in all scientific 
 work. The financial expense of making the change also is insignificant 
 compared with the convenience gained. In brief, I can see no reason 
 why we should not do this eminently sensible thing. (Theodore Bought 
 professor of physiology. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Va.) 
 
 I am glad to know about the movement to replace the Fahrenheit with 
 the centigrade. It is one which should have been started long ago. 
 The economic entomologists of all the countries of the world are a 
 cooperative and more or less mutually dependent body of men. Tem- 
 perature records occur frequently in all our publications, and there is 
 constant difficulty in the translation from one scale to another when 
 studying the papers published by the workers in other countries. (L. O. 
 Howard, Chief, Bureau of Entomology, Department of Agriculture, 
 Washington, D. C.) 
 
 To illustrate the inconvenience of the simultaneous use of two ther- 
 mometric scales, let me say that the matter is much the same as if we 
 used two systems of coinage — pounds sterling, shillings, and pence, 
 and dollars, dimes, an*d cents — in our mints and in our commercial trans- 
 actions. Some prices would be in pounds sterling, others in dollars. 
 The double system would be costly, confusing, and profit nothing. The 
 two scales of temperature are equally confusing. (Jf. D. Huhlard, chief 
 clerk. Bureau of Standards, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 The strongest argument for the centigrade scale is its simplicity. 
 {George F. Kay, head of department of geology. University of Iowa, Iowa 
 City, Iowa, director of Iowa Geological Survey.) 
 
 The Fahrenheit scale is unscientific to the verge of foolishness ; it is 
 clumsy and difficult to explain ; it has practically been given up in 
 scientific and in international work ; it stands in the way of progress, 
 civilization, and mutual international understanding. In electrical en- 
 gineering the centigrade scale is the acknowledged standard, to which 
 reference Is made in contracts and speciflcations, as indicated by the 
 standardization rules of the American Institute of Electrical Engineers. 
 The selection of 212° for the boiling point of water is so inconse- 
 quential as to be quaintly amusing. Any bill which will help to relieve 
 us of the humiliation of being the laughing-stock of Europe will be a 
 boon to America. (A. E. Kennelly, professor of electrical engineering. 
 Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 
 Ton are right. The sooner we become interested in international 
 measures, the better. (Oeorge F. Kunss, president New York Academy 
 of Sciences, 401 Fifth Ave., New York.) 
 
 The practical advantages of the centigrade seals over the Fahrenheit 
 are so obvious to anyone who has had any experience In making, using, 
 20806—14863 
 
18 
 
 and comparing temperature measurements, and the several arguments In 
 favor of the change are so well known to all who are competent judges 
 of the matter that It Is needless to recapitulate them. Scientific men 
 everywhere use the centigrade scale, and only among the English- 
 speaking peoples is the Fahrenheit scale used In daily life ; and, indeed, 
 Its hold there is due to the general conservatism of the people and to 
 the circumstance that t'hey have not appreciated the fact that there is a 
 more convenient way of recording temperatures. (i7o7m Johnston, physi- 
 cist, geophysical laboratory, Carnegie Institution of Washington.) 
 
 The Fahrenheit principle is absolutely unscientiflc and thoroughly 
 antiquated. The passage of your bill would signal a great progress, 
 scientific as well as economic, and would be the means of saving a great 
 amount of time, energy, and expenditure. (Berthold Laufer, curator 
 o-f anthropology. Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago.) 
 
 1 take great pleasure in indorsing your bill most heartily. The chief 
 object aimed at is to introduce simplicity in the place of the present 
 complicated system. The desirability of the change is so evident that 
 I can hardly see how the communication that you have sent me can be 
 much enlarged upon. (A, O. Leuschner, dean of graduate school. 
 University of California. Berkeley, Cal.) 
 
 1 think that scientists will be unanimous — certainly the physicists 
 will — in supporting your bill. It is an effort for us to think In terms 
 of the Fahrenheit scale, and its use Involves great loss of economy In 
 time and effort. (E. P. Lewis, professor of physics, University of 
 California, Berkeley, Cal.) 
 
 I am heartily In favor of the change. (Waldemar Lindgren, profes- 
 sor of economic geology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Boston, 
 Mass.) 
 
 I hope that the bill will be enacted. (Oeorge Grant MacOurdy, cura- 
 tor anthropological section, Peabody Museum of Natural History, Yale 
 University, New Haven, Conn.) 
 
 I have the honor to transmit herewith the letters which have been 
 received from the technical men of the Bureau of Mines regarding the 
 proposed bill lor the abolition of the Fahrenheit scale. Tou will note 
 that it is practically the unanimous opinion that the centigrade scale 
 should be used wherever possible, although under certain conditions it 
 is felt by some that the Fahrenheit scale should follow in parentheses, 
 at least until the public has become thoroughly familiar with the more 
 modern scale of temperature. (Fo» S, Manning, Director Bureau of 
 Mines, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 This whole question is one in which I am very much Interested, but 
 the change in scales has many far-reaching effects that are by no means 
 appreciated by the majority of those whose approval is noted in the 
 list you submit. It is obvious, however, that Dr. Stratton, of the Bu- 
 reau of Standards, fully appreciates the complexities of the situation. 
 1 think existing legislation gives authority to introduce the centigrade 
 scale, and additional legislation to that effect would seem to be unneces- 
 sary and have no more influence in abolishing the Fahrenheit scale than 
 that already on the statute books. New legislation at this time should 
 make the change more or less compulsory after a certain date, otherwise, 
 I feel that it will serve no useful purpose. (0. F. Marvin, Chief of 
 Weather Bureau, Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 The centigrade scale is in such nearly universal use by scientific men 
 and there is such a preponderating weight of reason to support this 
 usage that hardly any man of science as such could object to your bill. 
 20800—14863 
 
19 
 
 It Is Indeed unfortunate that the Irrational and clumsy English system 
 of pounds, feet, and Fahrenheit scale came into use in engineering before 
 the metric system was devised. This, indeed, is the only excuse It has 
 for remaining to burden us. (J If red ff. Mayer, director Department of 
 Marine Biology, Marine Laboratory of the Carnegie Institution of 
 Washington.) 
 
 I think that the move is undoubtedly in the right direction. Since 
 the centigrade scale is universally used in scientific work It is neces- 
 sary for anybody having to use temperature data given In the Fahren- 
 heit scale to make a transformation, and if this could be avoided In the 
 Government publications it would be very desirable. (Ernest O. Mer- 
 ritt, professor of physics, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y.) 
 
 That the centigrade scale presents obvious advantages over the Fah* 
 renheit is well recognized. Perhaps no standard of measurement as 
 widely used as that of temperature could be changed with less resulting 
 confusion and annoyance ; since temperature units, unlike those of 
 length, area, volume, and weight can not be employed to fix the dimen- 
 sions of enduring structures or to delimit land areas and become cm- 
 bodied in the permanent records of title thereto. (G. L. Morton, ex- 
 aminer, division 36, U. S. Patent Office, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 The bill will meet with the hearty approval of men who are working 
 In scientific investigation in this country. As it is, scientific men use 
 the centigrade thermometer practically universally. The Fahrenheit 
 scale should be abolished, since it is unnecessary, cumbersome, and out 
 of date. (Herhert V. Heal, professor of zoology, Tufts College, llass.)- 
 
 I favor the general adoption of the centigrade scale. (R. M. Ogden, 
 director psychological laboratory. University of Kansas, Lawrence, 
 Kans.) 
 
 The bill has my cordial approval. (IF. J. V, Ostcrhout, professor of 
 botany. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 
 The double standard Is very confusing, and as practically all scientifi'o 
 workers use only the centigrade the Fahrenheit is quite uniiccessary. 
 (Richard M. Pearce, in charge the John Herr Musser Department of 
 Eesearch Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pa.) 
 
 From a scientific standpoint, the change is undoubtedly desirable. 
 (Edward C. Pickering, professor of astronomy and director of Harvard 
 College Observatory, Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 
 I am heartily in favor of the bill. In the mere matter of the de- 
 scription of the weather the scale is not of great importance, but in 
 scientific calculations of thermodynamic quantities the centigrade de- 
 gree has the advantage of being international in most branches of 
 exact science. The only exception seems to be in steam engineering, 
 where the Fahrenheit degree has vogue along with the centigrade in the 
 United States and in Great Britain. Much real confusion and difficulty 
 exists on that account. For example, in the case of a man trained as 
 a chemist anywhere In the world, the centigrade degree has entered 
 Into all of his calculations of thermal quantities. When such a man 
 enters a profession related to steam engineering and to some branches 
 of chemical engineering operating in connection with heat engines in 
 the United States, he has the greatest difficulty with the use of the 
 Fahreuheit degree. These difficulties may be overcome by the use of 
 numerous conversion factors, but such difllcultles would be avoided 
 once for all by the use of the centigrade scale, which would be dis- 
 tinctly encouraged by weather reports of the Government in centigrade 
 degrees. (&. W. Pierce, director, Cruft Laboratory, and assistant pro- 
 fessor of physics. Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 20806 — 14863 
 
20 
 
 I most heartily approve of your bill. It will be an Immense saving 
 Sn time to all scientists and, wlien understood, a great convenience to 
 every one. 
 
 I secured the adoption of a resolution favoring the bill by the 
 Bescarch Club of the university, a body ot some 80 men who are 
 selected for their interest and accomplishments in investigation ot 
 all kinds. (W. B. Pillsbury, professor of psychology. University of 
 Michigan, Ann Arbor, Mich.) 
 
 Personally 1 favor the centigrade scale, but I thinlc that certain 
 bureaus of the Government, for example, the Weather Bureau, should 
 be allowed, but not compelled, to use this system exclusively. (M. J, 
 Itosenau, professor of preventive medicine and hygiene. Harvard Uni- 
 versity, Cambridge, Mass.) 
 
 I would express my unqualified approval. I have never met with 
 the remotest shadow of an argument in support of the Fahrenheit 
 scale. Everybody knows that the only reason for using this unscien- 
 tific and inconvenient scale is habit. It is high time to follow the 
 example of other nations in adopting a scale which shall harmonize 
 our temperature data with those of most of the world. (B. A. Ross, 
 professor of political economy. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.) 
 
 I am heartily in favor of the proposed bill, and I believe this opinion 
 will be shared by practically every man of science in this country. 
 The centigrade scale is now used to the exclusion of others in all 
 scientific publications except those of certain departments of our Gov- 
 ernment. The advantages of the change would apply to others than those 
 engaged in science. American travelers are bewildered on being con- 
 fronted with the centigrade scale abroad. The passage of this bill 
 would eventually remove this embarrassment. (Frank Schlesinger, 
 director. Allegheny Observatory, Allegheny, Pa.) 
 
 I can only Indorse this proposal as being to my mind a very desirable' 
 change. The Fahrenheit scale is inconvenient and clumsy. (W. A, 
 BetchcU, professor of botany. University of California, Berkeley, Cal.)' 
 
 The present use of two methods of registering temperatures by the 
 Government is absurd. The Department of Agriculture in all Its 
 scientific reports uses the centigrade. (S. P. Sharpies, chemist, 2G 
 Broad Street, Boston.) 
 
 I heartily approve of this measure and believe there would be no 
 difiiculty in obtaining the formal approval and indorsement of prac- 
 tically all the scientific men in this country. 
 
 I inclose herewith a copy of a resolution which was adopted at the 
 last regular meeting of the Botanical Society ot Washington, Novem- 
 ter 2. We inti'oduced this resolution as we thought an expression 
 from a large and important botanical organization would carry more 
 weight than a mere personal indorsement. 
 
 To scientific men no arguments in regard to the desirability of this 
 measure are needed. The need of uniformity in recording temperature 
 measurements throughout the world would seem to be sufiicient cause 
 for the adoption of the centigrade scale, which is already in use by 
 practically all scientists. ((7. L. Shear, secretary-treasurer American 
 Phytopathological Society ; Phytcpathologist, Bureau of Plant Indus- 
 try, Department ot Agriculture, Washington, D C.) 
 
 It is in lino with scientific progress. Everything in this world 
 should be subject to advance and improvement whenever possible. 
 The world would stand still it precedent or long usage were consid- 
 ered a vaiid argument for never making any changes. (Henry Skin- 
 ner, in cliarge of Entomology Department, American Academy ot 
 Natural Sciences, Philadelphia.) 
 20806—14863 
 
21 
 
 It Is greatly to be hoped that the bill will become a law. (Oeorge 
 Otis Smith, Director United States Geological Survey, Washington, 
 D. C.) 
 
 The change will have to be made some time, tor It is simply incon- 
 ceivable that the Irrational Fahrenheit- scale will be forever tolerated 
 by an educated people. A famous proverb says, " Never put oCE till 
 to-morrow what you can do to-day." Suppose the change was post- 
 poned till 1935 ; that would mean that the thousands of people who 
 study temperatures recorded In different countries would be subjected 
 for 20 years longer to the nuisance of having to thinlc in two scales 
 and having to convert one into the other. It would mean that thou- 
 sands of new Fahrenheit thermometers would be made each year, to 
 be discarded in 1935 and till then to afflict thousands of logical 
 minds. It would mean that the Intelligent and skilled workmen who 
 make these thermometers would have to blush each time they etch the 
 foolish scale on the wise instrument. It would also mean that the ris- 
 ing generation during the next 20 years must be taught an antiquated. 
 Irrational, difficult system, and many thousands of students must be 
 taught two systems, when by a little manly resolution we can relieve 
 them of that burden and leave to them the positive enjoyment of 
 learning the easy, up-to-date, logical centigrade scale. Finally, when 
 the change does come, the inconvenience attending It will be just the 
 same as now, probably greater, because there will be more Fahrenheit 
 thermometers to dis<'ard or remodel, more people to unlearn the anti- 
 quated scale, more irrational Fahrenheit records to be translated into 
 the rational scale. 
 
 Let us not shift our burden needlessly, sluggishly, cravenly onto the 
 shoulders of our successors ; they will have plenty of burdens of their 
 own. Let us profit by the opportunity to 'earn high credit for energy 
 and progressive spirit ourselves and to stimulate our successors by 
 our example to earn similar credit in the many lines that will still be 
 open to them. Of course, the born kickers, like the poor, are always 
 with us, and they are doubtless getting ready now to say no ; but 
 when the change is made, as it Is sure to be made. In the near future, 
 they will congratulate themselves if, through an undeserved mercy, 
 their false step remains unltnown to the public. 
 
 It is an insult to the American people to say that they are not suf- 
 ficiently enlightened to consent to the change. The facts are so simple 
 that any boy of 14 can understand them. There was no popu'ar op- 
 position to the Introduction of standard time some SO years ago, 
 although that problem is far more difficult for the untrained mind to 
 grasp than the centigrade scale. 
 
 Some scientific men hold aloof from the most glaringly beneficial 
 measures from a fear of the trite objection that the benefits will 
 accrue to scientists alone. According to that curious doctrine, the pro- 
 ducers of lumber, wool, sugar, or iron ought not to advocate measures 
 for their own benefit but wait in humble modesty for some one not 
 Interested in lumber, wool, sugar, or iron to render them that service. 
 Our business men do hear that objection every day, but their healthy 
 common sense tells them to ignore it as the inevitable, unsilenceable 
 wagging of irresponsible tongues. Scientific men have as good a right 
 as any other class to defend their interests, even if it were true that 
 the general public derived no benefit from the proposed measxire. In 
 point of fact, in the present case the general public, through sheer 
 vastness of numbers, would be the principal gainers, even though the 
 average scientist would be benefited more than the average citizen. It 
 20806—14863 
 
22 
 
 ought not to be necessary to point out to intelligent people that 
 scientists, like other workers, have to charge for their work, and that 
 whatever makes the producer's work harder necessarily adds to the 
 cost of his product, while conversely, whatever makes his work easier 
 cheapens his product to the public. It is not the scientist alone that 
 is compelled by the Fahrenheit scale to incur an unnecessary expendi- 
 ture of extra time and labor ; it is the public also which has to pay 
 him extra cash for that unnecessary expenditure. But the greatest 
 gain to the public will be educational. Of the 20,000,000 school chil- 
 dren in this country few ever learn to understand what a degree o£ 
 temperature means, because the Fahrenheit scale is too difficult to 
 learn, too difficult to remember. Call freezing point zero and boiling 
 point 100, and every child will at once understand It and remember It 
 through life. (Middleton Smith, Bureau of Crop Estimates, Depart- 
 ment of Agriculture. Washington, D. C. ; member of tha Point Barrow 
 Arctic Expedition of 1881-1883.) 
 
 My first impulse Is so strong in favor of the end you are endeavor- 
 ing to accomplish, viz, to displace the Fahrenheit scale by the far 
 more desirable centigrade scale, that I am almost led to favor any 
 bill for that end. Yet upon careful reflection I feel that very care- 
 ful consideration will have to be given to the form in which the bill 
 Is drawn in order that it may not cause serious trouble in the rela- 
 tion of the work of the Government to some industries that are In- 
 tended to be assisted by that work. 
 
 Practically all scientific workers and a large percentage of engi- 
 neers would welcome the general use of the centigrade scale. It la^ 
 also probably true that no one factor would so materially contribute 
 (0 the use of the centigrade scale as its adoption by the Government. 
 The greatest factor in cdurtiting the public in the use of that scale 
 would be the publication of weather reports by the United States 
 Weather Bureau in terms of centigrade degrees. Indeed this question 
 is so intimately related to the work of that bureau that I woTild sug- 
 gest that any contemplated bill be submitted to the Weather Bureau 
 for criticism and suggestions. 
 
 While it is true that a very large part of the engineering work oC 
 the Bureau of Standards is at present carried out on the centigrade 
 scale, there are cases where, in view of the units of measurement 
 employed in the industries, it is necessary for the bureau to publish 
 its results based on the Fahrenheit scale. In order to make the work 
 easily intelligible and really useful to those it is intended to serve. 
 Examples are the following : 
 
 The heating values of fuels are expressed in Industrial tests in terms 
 of the British thermal unit, which is the amount of heat required to 
 heat 1 pound of water 1 degree Fahrenheit This unit, the Btu, Is 
 written into municipal legislation, orders of public-service commissions, 
 etc. — e. g., in laws specifying that gas shall have a heating value of 
 a stated number of Btu. 
 
 Again, all gas is now metered and sold In cubic feet of gas, measured 
 at 00° Fahrenheit and 30 inches barometric pressure. 
 
 A sweeping law, therefore, that would absolutely prohibit the Gov- 
 ernment from speaking In units that .are in. universal use might in 
 these cases work great inconvenience. It is hardly probable that 
 engineering societies and the technical public would abandon these 
 units, at least not immediately, simply because the Government' has 
 done so. 
 
 20806— 148G3 
 
23 
 
 Agalu, take the question of clinical thermometers used by the phy- 
 sician. Hundreds of ftiousands of these are used bjr the physicians in 
 this country, and many thousands are sent annually to the Bureau of 
 Standards to be tested. If the results of our tests are to have any 
 value, we must give the corrections in Fahrenheit degrees. Physicians 
 will not at once abandon the Fahrenheit scale because the Government 
 rei^uses to use it. Indeed, for some years the medical bureaus of the 
 Government have been using clinical thermometers graduated on the 
 centigrade scale. 
 
 I wish to make it clear that I do not regard the examples cited as 
 In any sense insuperable obstacles to a bill that will accomplish what is 
 desired. But such questions should be carefully considered in drawing 
 up a bill, to prevent imposing n very serious handicap on the work of 
 some of the Government bureaus. 
 
 Possibly some of the difficulties would be removed by stating that 
 the centigrade scale shall be the standard scale after a certain date in all 
 Government publications, but that the use of the two scales side by 
 side, the Fahrenheit in a secondary or parenthetical sense, is jjcrmitted 
 for a period of years, say five, before the latter is entirely outlawed. 
 It would seem to me quite probable that such an arrangement would 
 be most satisfactory to the Weather Bureau, as it would gradually 
 accustom the public to the new scale. It is quite conceivable that great 
 dissatisfaction would result if the weather reports were suddenly pub- 
 lished in terms of the new scale. 
 
 There is one other feature that I should like to have understood, and 
 that is just what constitutes publication. This bureau is called upon 
 to test all kinds of instruments for the general public, including instru- 
 ments for temperature measurement. A certificate of test is issued tor 
 such instruments. I would like to make the point that such a certiflcate 
 of test does not constitute " publication " in the sense intended iu this 
 bill. Obviously, such an " interpretation of the bill would seriously 
 interfere with the functions of this bureau in its work of testing for 
 the public If the public continues to use Fahrenheit instruments for 
 some time after the use of that scale has been abandoned by the Gov- 
 ernment, it is obvious that the bureau must report its tests in terms of 
 the scale on which the instrument is constructed. For example, suppose 
 the medical profession continues to use Fahrenheit clinical thermometers. 
 Then the bureau would have to do one of two things — either report the 
 results of the tests on the Fahrenheit scale or take the stand that on 
 and after the specified date it will recuse to test clinical thermometers 
 graduated on the Fahrenheit scale. 
 
 Let me assure you of my full sympathy with the objects in view and 
 of my hope that the bill may be put into satisfactory form, so that it 
 will, cause no serious inconvenience either to the public or to the several 
 bureaus of the Government immediately concerned. 
 
 [Second letter.] 
 
 I am most heartily in sympathy with the effort to substitute the centi- 
 grade for the Fahrenheit scale. It is always dilEcult to make estimates 
 of public opinion, but I feel fully convinced that scientific men are 
 almost unanimously In favor of such a step, and a very large majority 
 of our engineers would welcome the change, certainly the most progres- 
 sive engineers would. We might as well admit that it would cause some 
 Inconvenience — " trouble," if you choose to call it such — but what im- 
 portant reform can be accomplished without Inconvenience? I feel rea- 
 20806—14863 
 
24 
 
 Bonably certain that a vast majority of our scientifle and engineering 
 public are of the opinion that the advantages refulting from the change 
 would far outweigh ail the inconveniences that might result during the 
 few years of transition from one scale to the other. 
 
 The strongest reason in favor of the Bubstitutiou of the centigrade for 
 the Fahrenheit scale is that it is a big step in the direction of a world- 
 wide use of a single scale of temperature. It is probably safe to say 
 that at least eight-tenths of the important scientific data in the world 
 are published in the centigrade scale. Practically the only countries in 
 which the Fahrenheit scale is used to any considerable extent are the 
 United States and Great Britain, and in these countries the use of the 
 centigrade scale is constantly increasing. Thus in the regulations of the 
 London gas referees the centigrade scale has been adopted tor the test- 
 ing of gas. The international weather map, published by our Weather 
 Bureau, uses the centigrade scale, since the reports received from all 
 other countries are transmitted in terms of that scale. Many of the 
 committees of our technical and engineering societies, such as the Ameri- 
 can Society of Civil Engineers, the American Society for Testing Ma- 
 terials, the American Society for Municipal Improvements, the American 
 Chemical Society, the American Electrochemical Society, the American 
 Institute of Electrical Engineers, etc., have adopted the centigrade scale 
 in the standard specifications and tests prepared for and adopted by 
 these societies. 
 
 In my opinion the strongest reason for the adoption of the centigrade 
 scale is the one above given, viz, the international uniformity. Many 
 other reasons, relatively less important, may be cited. The lower fixed 
 point on the centigrade scale, the zero point, is a natural fixed point of 
 great economic importance in the economy of nature. The freezing 
 point of water, the large amounts of latent heat involved in the change 
 of state of water to ice and vice versa, have an important bearing on 
 climatic conditions, on the safety of crops, the preservation of foods, and 
 every phase of our daily life. From every point of view, the centigrade 
 scale, with freezing point of water 0° and the boiling point of water 
 100°, is a more rational scale than the Fahrenheit. 
 
 [Third letter.] 
 
 Our everyday affairs are closely related to the temperature at which 
 water freezes. Its influpuce on climate, clothing, plant life, foods, 
 transportation, and a hundred other phases of our daily life is so great 
 that it is desirable that our temperatures be reckoned from that point. 
 Theimometers are made and tested with reference to this natural fixed 
 point. (Dr. S. W. Stration, Director Bureau of Standards, Washington, 
 D. C.) 
 
 I thoroughly approve of your suggestion and should be glad to help 
 in any way possible. (Oarl C. Tliomat!, professor of mechanical engi- 
 neering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore.) 
 
 You will have the support of the educated and scientific men of the 
 country, and as soon as the oublic becomes accustomed to the change 
 it Avili meet with popular approval. (J. B. T. Tapper, Chief of Law 
 Division, Internal-Revenue Bureau, Treasury Department, Washington, 
 D. C.) 
 
 Of 11 members of our department of mathematics, practically all, 
 including myself, are of opinion that the change ought to bo made., 
 (//. 17. Tyler, In charge of department of mathematics, Massachusetts 
 Institute of Technology, Boston, Mass.) 
 20806—14863 
 
25 
 
 Not only do I approve of the proposal, but I have submitted the 
 matter to Mr. F. A. Kartak, In charge of the State standards here, and 
 he states that "the adoption of the centigrade scale of temperature 
 measurement "would be of Inestimable value to the engineer as well as 
 to the scientist. The electrical-engineering profession has been fortunate 
 In the adoption of this temperature scale by the national society in this 
 country — the American Institute of Electrical Engineers — and as a 
 result an untold amount of time and labor has been saved. In con- 
 nection with electrical testing and standardizing work this temperature 
 scale is used exclusively, not only in the standards laboratory of the 
 University of Wisconsin, but in all similar- laboratories throughout the 
 country. There would seem to be no real obstacle in the way of the 
 general adoption of this temperature scale, except perhaps the inertia 
 of custom, which will undoubtedly prove to be a smaller obstacle than 
 might be anticipated." {Charles R. Van Hise, president University of 
 Wisconsin, Madison, Wis.) 
 
 It is a step which should have been taken long ago, and the reasons 
 are too obvious and too numerous to mention. You will find practically 
 all working scientists in accord on this subject, inasmuch as the ma- 
 jority have long ago given up the Fahrenheit scale. (.L. B. Walton, 
 department of biology, Keuyon College, Gambier, Ohio.) 
 
 At present all data published in scientific journals are In the centi- 
 grade, and those in some Government publications, as well as in some 
 popular journals which follow them, are in the other scale. The result 
 is great confusion. So far as I know, scientific men are absolutely a 
 unit in desiring the centigrade scale adopted. {Henry B. Ward, in 
 charge of department of zoology. University of UUnois, Urbana, 111.) 
 
 The proposed bill meets with the approval of this ofiice. (W. A. 
 Warfield, surgeon in chief, Freedmen's Hospital, Washington, D. C.) 
 
 The reasons in favor of this bill seem to me so numerous and so 
 obvious as to require little discussion. I feel sure that I speak for my 
 colleagues when I say that we would most heartily welcome the change. 
 (H. if. Whctzel, professor of plant pathology. New York State College 
 of Agriculture, Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y.) 
 
 You are to be congratulated on this bill. {Henry S. White, professor 
 of mathematics, Vassar College, Poughkecpsie, N. Y.) 
 
 The centigrade system has long ago proved more convenient than the 
 Fahrenheit. {H. V. Wilson, professor of zoology. University of North 
 Carolina, Chapel Hill, N. C.) 
 
 Replying to your favor siddressed to our Mr. H. Y. Norwood, relative 
 to your bill H. E. 528, I would say that all those who are specially 
 interested in thermometric measurements have long recognized the 
 centigrade as the logical scale. It is particularly desirable in the 
 higher ranges of temperature in the various manufacturing arts, but 
 the difficulty of training workmen has precluded its general adoption. 
 When once, however, the layman becomes familiar with the relative 
 values of the centigrade scale its universal adoption will be assured, 
 and without doubt the ideal method of procedure to bring about what 
 must be a gradual change in any event is for the Government to 
 IJublish it each day in its various reports. Tlie corresponding Fahren- 
 heit values in parentheses will not only furnish the necessary interpre- 
 tation but will, we believe, arouse a curiosity whicli will lead to 
 further investigation on the part of the public, thus gradually fixing 
 firmly in their minds the advantage of this uniform- subdivision. 
 20S0G— 148C3 
 
26 
 
 Naturally the -maBufacturer of tbermomotric instruments will en- 
 counter extra labor and expense in the adjustments incident to such a 
 change, but realizing the advantage of having eventually a uniform 
 standard we would welcome the general adoption of the centigrade 
 scale. (Herbert J. Winn, president Taylor Instrument Cos., Rochester, 
 N. y.) 
 
 It would certainly be a great step toward simplification. (O. E. A. 
 Winslow, Anna M. R. Lauder professor of public health, School of 
 Medicine, Yale University, New Haven, Conn.) 
 
 There is every reason why the change should be made. Practically 
 all foreign publications use the centigrade scale, and since it presents 
 no difficulty to popular comprehension, I see no possible objection to 
 the change. {Clark Wissler, curator department of anthropology, 
 American Museum of Natural History, New York.) 
 
 While I am duly conscious of the criminal waste of time which has 
 been imposed upon the people of this country by the Fahrenheit scale, 
 still I am disposed to exercise clemency, and would suggest that the 
 Fahrenheit thermometer be not abolished, but simply retired to the 
 privacy of museums, there to remain as evidence of foolish and wasteful 
 conservatism, iltohert 3. Wolcott, head of department of zoology. 
 University of Nebraslia, Lincoln, Nebr.) 
 
 1 am strongly in favor of the use of the centigrade in all United 
 States Government publications. Practically all other scientiflc publica- 
 tions have adopted this rule. (Charles Zeleny, professor of zoology. 
 University of Illinois, Urbana, 111.) 
 20806—14863 
 
 o 
 
QC 271.J6r"'""'"'""""-"'"'^ 
 
 *5o''sh the Fahrenheit thermometer. 
 
 3 1924 012 338 400