International Vocabulary of Metrology (VIM) is a “System of Units”, not a “System of Measurement”. The VIM explains the terminology used in publications related to measurement, including the official SI brochure.

Background

Communication between people relies on an agreement as to what various words/gestures mean. The Oxford English Dictionary (OED) provides a reference point for words used in everyday English. Its model is to catalogue words that have become commonplace in the English language once they have been widely accepted. However, this does not prevent differences in meaning emerging on each side of the Atlantic Ocean. The motor industry is a prime example of how two different vocabularies have emerged despite the same technology.

Many specialised disciplines have produced dictionaries of jargon that has become commonplace in that particular discipline. Often the dictionaries concerned use definitions that originate in academia to forestall multiple concepts being attached to the same word or one concept having multiple names. In the case of metrology, eight international organisations including BIPM and ISO have joined forces to create an organisation called the Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology (JCGM). Their brief is to produce documents that ensure consistency in language across the work of all the member organisations. [Ref 1] To date two documents have appeared – International Vocabulary of Metrology (VIM) [Ref 2] and Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement (GUM). The documents themselves are published by the constituent organisations using their own covers and are available free of charge on the Internet.

International Vocabulary of Metrology

The first of these two documents is of principal interest to MV readers as it defines the terminology used in the SI Brochure and elsewhere. Moreover, both VIM and GUM appears as bilingual documents with the aim of ensuring a one-to-one correspondence between the English and the French languages. Countries that use languages other than English or French are encouraged to translate these documents into their own languages. To date the author has identified translations in Spanish [Ref 3], Italian [Ref 4] and German [ref 5].

The fourth edition of VIM is currently undergoing review, so this article will discuss the third edition (published 2008, updated 2012). The document contains five chapters:

1. Quantities and units
2. Measurement
3. Devices for measurement
4. Properties of measuring devices
5. Measurement standards (Etalons)

Readers of MV are probably most interested in Chapter 1 of the guide with Chapters 2 and 5 putting the contents of Chapter 1 into context.

The first section has formal descriptions of the terms used to describe a system of units starting with the description of a “quantity” which can either be continuous in nature such as “length”, “mass” etc or discrete in nature such as “Rockwell hardness”.  It formally defines a hierarchy of concepts, many of which are dependent on concepts that have been previously defined. For example, the formal definition of the “International System of Units” (VIM definition 1.16) is:

“system of units, based on the International System of Quantities, their names and symbols, including a series of prefixes and their names and symbols, together with rules for their use, adopted by the General Conference on Weights and Measures (CGPM)”.

This definition is dependent on the definitions “system of units” (VIM definition 1.13) and “International System of Quantities” (VIM definition 1.6), both of which are defined within the document. [Note 3]

The way in which systems of units are defined is done in a way that is context neutral – the definitions hold equally well for the imperial system as they do for SI with the obvious exception that the imperial system does not comply with the definition of a “coherent system of units”.

The rest of the document is oriented towards making measurements and how one should express uncertainties associated with such operations.  The concluding chapter provides a vocabulary for the creation of physical standards such as the UK national prototype metre and kilogram which are held by the NPL and copies of those standards that are held by trading standards officers. I will not describe those sections in detail –VIM can easily be downloaded from the internet.

“System of Measurement” or “System of Units”?

The document’s introduction has a paragraph on the use of the French words “mesure” and “mesurage” and in particular why the word “mesure” can be ambiguous unless it has a qualifier such as “unité de mesure”. One of the consequences of this is that the English equivalent of the expression “système de mesure” is “measuring system” (VIM definition 3.2) while VIM makes no mention of the English phrase “system of measurement”.  [Note 1].

VIM describes the term “system of units” (VIM definition 1.13) [Notes 2 & 3] as being equivalent to the French “système d’unités”. The Spanish equivalent is “sistema de unidades” while the Italian and German translations likewise have equivalents of the word “units” rather than the word “measurements”.  This suggests that the use of the expression “System of measurement” should be abandoned for of the expression “System of units” (which can be taken to be a shorthand for “system of units of measurement”).

SI is, of course, an abbreviation for “Système international d’unités” or, in English “International System of Units”.

Finally …

The author recommends that anybody who is writing about the metric system reads the International Vocabulary of Metrology, if only to ensure that they are aware of the correct use of vocabulary.

Notes

1. “Measuring System” (VIM definition 3.2) is defined as “set of one or more measuring instruments and often other devices …”
2. “System of Units” is defined “set of base units and derived units, together with their multiples and submultiples, defined in accordance with given rules, for a given system of quantities”.
3. Items in bold are defined within VIM.

 References

1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Committee_for_Guides_in_Metrology
2. https://www.bipm.org/documents/20126/2071204/JCGM_200_2012.pdf/f0e1ad45-d337-bbeb-53a6-15fe649d0ff1  
3. https://www.cem.es/sites/default/files/vim-cem-2012web.pdf
4. https://www.eurachem.org/images/stories/Guides/pdf/TAM_2011_IT.pdf
5. https://www.libristo.eu/en/book/internationales-worterbuch-der-metrologie-international-vocabulary-of-basic-and-general-terms-in-metrology_01480812

The International Organisation for Legal Metrology (OIML from the French “Organisation Internationale de Métrologie Légale”) is housed in a non-descript office in the Rue Turgot in the 9th arrondissement of Paris and is about 700 metres the from the Gare du Nord. Like the BIPM, the OIML is an inter-governmental organisation which gives its staff quasi-diplomatic status, though, like the BIPM, French nationals pay French income tax. The OIML works closely with BIPM, the International Standards Organization (ISO) and other international bodies in coordinating metrology around the globe, with each organisation having its own specific role.

Logo of the OIML

MV readers are no doubt aware of the role of BIPM is to define units of measure and the means to realise those definitions to the highest degree possible. This might be good for science, but what about the practical world? If I buy a kilogram of sugar, am I really bothered whether it is a few grains short or whether it is a few grains over the specified weight? The cost of getting that packet correct to the nearest microgram will far exceed the cost of the sugar. This is where the OIML come in. The role of the OIML is best explained by an example. In the years leading up to 1976, the OIML and the EEC worked together to produce a specification (Directive CEE 76/211) which resulted in the “e” (for “estimated”) symbol that now appears on packets of sugar (and many other goods).  In the case of 1 kg packets of sugar, the EU directive requires that the average weight per packet in a batch shall be at least 1 kg and that the maximum short weight allowed for any one packet in that batch is 7.5 grams.  A number of countries outside the EU including Australia and South Africa have included the EEC specification into their domestic legislation. The UK, on leaving the EU has retained the legislation that was produced under the directive.

OIML Establishment

The OIML is an inter-governmental organisation established in 1955 to facilitate and coordinate legal metrology on an international scale. “Legal Metrology” is the discipline of making and recording measurements that have a legal implication. This includes but is not restricted situations where the amount of money that changes hands is dependent on a measurement, where a party might have a liability for their product which is measurement-dependant or where a measurement will determine whether an offence (such as speeding, drink-drive etc) has been committed. Part of the OIML’s brief is to assist in the international harmonisation of legislation in such matters.

The OIML has a three-tier structure – the “Conference” which consists of representatives from the member states, and which meets once every four years, the “International Committee” which oversees technical work, and which drafts formal output from such work and the “Bureau”, a secretariat based in Paris. Much of the CIPM’s work is done through specialist committees whose members are employed by metrology-oriented organisations in participating member states.

The three principal activities of the OIML are:

• Overseeing of and issuing of internationally recognised (“Mutual recognition”) certificates to laboratories around the world certifying that their work is in accordance with international standards.
• Publication of recommended standards pertaining to legal metrology and production of expert examinations from a metrology point of view of proposed legislation.
• Joint publications with other organisations such as ISO and BIPM to ensure that there are no contradictions between outputs from the various organisations.

OIML Outputs

The principal outputs from the OIML are sets of publications. Those of interest to readers of MV are:

Joint activities with other organisations which include:

• The International Vocabulary of Metrology (VIM) which is a joint production between eight organisations.
• Liaison with the BIPM’s Consultative Committee on Units, the committee which, amongst other things, produces the SI Brochure.

Recommended standards that member states are advised to incorporate into their own laws. To date 150 recommendations have been published. Published recommendations are revisited once every few years at which time some are revised while others might be deprecated. At the current time there are 104 current recommendations. Recommendations that have been published that are of interest to MV readers include:

• R 52-en – “Hexagonal weights – Metrological and technical requirements”. Hexagonal weights have been used for metric units for over a century. This recommendation describes standard sizes so that the user can mix-and-match weights from different manufacturers.               
• R 76-en – “non-automatic weighing instruments” – This recommendation describes the specifications for four different classes of weighing devices – defined as Class I, Class II, Class III and Class IIII respectively. Supermarkets and similar establishments are usually required to have Class III devices (ability to weigh objects up to 1 part in 10 000) whereas Class IIII devices (up to 1 part in 1500) are designed for use in mobile medical health clinics.
• R 111-en – “Weights of classes E1, E2, F1, F2, M1, M1-2, M2, M2-3 and M3”. This recommendation defines eight different classes of weights, each class having different accuracy requirements. If goes without saying that cheaper weights have less accuracy but are often more robust.
• R 138-en – “Vessels for commercial transactions”. This recommendation describes, amongst other things, the allowances made when calibrating glasses for use in pubs.

Other recommendations include taxi meters, speech audiometry equipment, automatic rail weighbridges, vehicle exhaust measuring instruments, speedometers and so on.

Finally, the OIML is sometimes asked to produce expert reports of certain topics. Seven such reports have been produced including the report that led to the EEC (as it was) introducing the “e” mark for an “estimated quantity”.

Conclusions

Rather than summarising the work done by the OIML, let me give two examples from their various outputs which I believe will give MV readers food for thought:

• Imperial pint glasses are variously described as being equivalent to 568 ml or 570 ml. OIML recommendation R 138-en allows a maximum error of (10 ml + 2.5%V) for glasses where the volume shown by a gauge mark (V is the nominal volume of the glass). This is far greater than the 2 ml variation in describing the size of the glasses. Thus, if a manufacturer exercises reasonable care in manufacturing such glasses, their products can fit either description of the pint.
• The SI is often described as a “System of measurement” which is a shorthand for “System of units of measurement”. VIM describes the “International System of Units” as a “system of units based on the …” and it describes a “Measurement system” as “set of one or more measuring instruments …”.  VIM also draws to attention that in French, the translation of “measurement system” and “system of measurement” are identical – “système de mesure”. This is the underlying reason why VIM describes the SI as a “system of units” rather than a “system of measurement” – after all, “SI” translates to “International System of Units”, not “International System of Measurement”.

References

1. OIML home page: www.oiml.org
2. OIML analysis of EEC directive CEE 76/211:  https://www.oiml.org/en/files/pdf_e/e004-e04.pdf/view
3. SI Brochure (9th edition): https://www.bipm.org/documents/20126/41483022/SI-Brochure-9-EN.pdf (Para 1.3)
4. List of OIML Recommendations: https://www.oiml.org/en/publications/recommendations
5. Text of the International Vocabulary of Metrology: https://www.oiml.org/en/files/pdf_v/v002-200-e07.pdf

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) opened a project on 31 January 2023 to consider the use of unit pricing in the groceries sector. On 20 July 2023, the CMA published its unit pricing review findings. On 30 January 2024, the CMA published its findings from consumer research and unit pricing analysis. These findings examined the awareness, presence and prominence of unit pricing, who uses it and how many use it. Unit pricing is one tool used by consumers among many in making decisions about purchases.

The findings appear in four different documents, which are all downloadable from the CMA Unit Pricing page on the gov.uk website:

• Consumer research report
• Unit pricing analysis report
• Short summary report
• Short guide

The consumer research report looks at how and when consumers use unit pricing. The CMA found that shoppers most commonly used unit pricing when comparing the same product in different formats, making substantial purchases, helping to select a product when overwhelmed by choice, checking whether supermarket deals were good value for money, shopping for new or infrequently purchased products and buying in bulk.

The unit pricing analysis report is about cases where shoppers can use unit pricing effectively and the impact of retail practices on shoppers.

The summary report presents the highlights of the CMA’s work. It presents findings about consumers’ awareness, understanding and use of unit pricing information, factors that influence use of unit pricing, how shoppers may be losing out by making wrong assumptions about what is best value, how unit pricing can help shoppers identify savings and the CMA’s conclusions.

The CMA’s short guide to unit pricing is a brief and simple unit pricing guide for consumers to help them to get the most out of unit pricing information.

The CMA describes the current situation of unit pricing in the groceries sector and looks at how improvements can be made. This is an important contribution to improving the system of unit pricing for shoppers and ensuring that unit prices are shown where they should appear.

Sources and further information:

• https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/unit-pricing-analysis-and-consumer-research
• https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/unit-pricing-analysis-and-consumer-research/summary-of-consumer-research-and-unit-pricing-analysis
• https://competitionandmarkets.blog.gov.uk/2024/01/30/a-short-guide-to-unit-pricing/
• https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/unit-pricing-information-for-consumers/unit-pricing-information-for-consumers
• https://www2.oxfordshire.gov.uk/cms/sites/default/files/folders/documents/business/tradingstandards/PriceMarkingofGoods.pdf
• https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/102/contents/made (Price Marking Order 2004)

For Clubcard offers, you could only see the price per unit for the original price but not for the Clubcard price. Tesco has announced that unit pricing will also be shown for the Clubcard price as well. This will enable Clubcard holders to see that they are getting the best deal.

Will other supermarkets follow suit and show unit pricing for member-only offers (i.e. exclusive prices for loyalty card holders)? I welcome Tesco’s plan to show unit pricing for member-only offers. This is long overdue. If unit pricing must be shown for the original price, it should also be shown for the discounted price to enable shoppers to compare prices and get the best deal.

Last year, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) investigated unit pricing practices in the groceries sector. One of the problems that the CMA found was the omission of unit prices for discounted products. Which? has claimed that Tesco could be breaking the law due to unclear pricing. Which? published its article about Tesco pricing practices on its website in June 2023. It has taken Tesco over half a year to respond to Which?’s criticism about the lack of unit pricing on its Clubcard offers.

One important feature of unit pricing that ensures that shoppers can compare like with like is that it is based on the use of a single measurement system. This measurement system is the metric system. It would not work well if some unit prices used metric units and other unit prices used imperial units. It is a fundamental tool for shoppers to make quick and easy comparisons and get the best value for money. Unit pricing is especially helpful during the cost-of-living crisis.

Tesco’s announcement was reported in the Metro newspaper on 20 February 2024. You can read the full Metro article here.

120 years ago, in addition to the activities of their members, the Decimal Association made use of pamphlets to make their case for the adoption of the metric system in place of the bewildering array of imperial weights and measures that were in use at the time.

A century before the internet, booklets and circulars played an important role in the activities of campaign organisations. A key pamphlet by the Decimal Association, Reasons Why, contained a list of “Reasons why the Metric Weights and Measures should be made Compulsory throughout the British Empire”.

click on the image to access the pdf

In March 1904, following the unanimous vote in the House of Lords in favour of a Bill which would have seen the UK switch to the metric system over a 2-year period, this pamphlet was updated.

The Reasons Why pamphlet was one of the enclosures of a letter sent out by the Decimal Association on 8 March 1904. This letter was reproduced in a recent Metric Views article.

The pamphlet most likely would have been intended to be seen by MPs before a debate that had been anticipated to take place in the House of Commons on the Bill that had already been passed in the House of Lords. The pamphlet listed the names of 333 “Members of Parliament who have signified their approval of the adoption of the metric weights and measures, most of them being in favour of a compulsory measure”. Unfortunately, the debate never took place. Had it done so, there seems a strong possibility that the UK could have become a fully metric country before 1910. However, a Commons debate on a similar Bill did take place three years later, in 1907, but that Bill was defeated.

Reasons Why

In many respects, the sections in the Reasons Why pamphlet resemble some of UKMA’s webpages from over a century later. The following extracts are reproduced from the March 1904 edition of Reasons Why.

Reasons why the Metric Weights and Measures should be made Compulsory throughout the British Empire.

1. – The chief reason of all is that we now make difficulties for ourselves in relation to our foreign trade with metric countries, and lose business because we do not manufacture and sell in terms of the metric system. To avoid the trouble, confusion and expense of having one system of weights and measures for our home trade and another for our foreign trade, we should adopt the metric weights and measures for all purposes and so place ourselves on an equal footing with our competitors.

2. – If Great Britain were to adopt the metric weights and measures, it is certain that the United States and Russia would follow suit. There would then be an international system of weights and measures, and this would be a great gain to all concerned.

3. – In 1895 a Select Committee of the House of Commons received a large amount of evidence and reported as follows :-

  (a) That the Metric System of Weights and Measures be at once legalised for all purposes.
  (b) That after a lapse of two years the Metric System be rendered compulsory by Act of Parliament.
  (c) That the Metric System of Weights and Measures be taught in all public elementary schools as a necessary and integral part of arithmetic, and that decimals be introduced at an earlier period of the school curriculum than is the case at present.

Since then the metric system has been made permissive, and recommendation c has been carried out. It now remains to give effect to b.

4. – Our customers in the Metric countries, which have a population of over 483,000,000 (see list, page 12), do not understand quotations and specifications based on British weights and measures. Often they cannot spare the time required to calculate the metric equivalents, and prefer to deal with German and other makers who use the Metric System.

5. – At present the British manufacturer, especially of machinery, who makes goods for Metric countries as well as his own, must work to one system of weights and measures for his home trade, and to another for his foreign trade. In several trades this also involves two sets of costly patterns, while the principals, the clerks, the mechanics and others, must use both systems of measurement.

6. – This means increased trouble and expense from which our foreign competitors, who use the Metric System, and no other, are free.

7. – If we keep to our old Imperial weights and measures, and invoice foreign traders according to the Metric System, there must be many intricate calculations and many risks of mistakes.

8. – In many branches of trade our manufacturers are seriously handicapped. They have to make and sell for the home market where our old weights and measures are still in use, and at the same time they are told that if they don’t make and sell on the Metric System for abroad, they cannot compete favourably with our keen competitors from Germany and other countries. But, as already pointed out, no manufacturer can work on two systems of weights and measures without serious inconvenience.

10. – From time to time many of our Consuls abroad have urged the importance of our making and selling on the basis of the Metric System. (See Extracts, page 13.)

11. – In October, 1898, the Commercial, Labour and Statistical Department of the Board of Trade issued a valuable collection of “Opinions of H.M. Diplomatic and Consular Officers on British Trade Methods.” Extracts were given from 171 reports received from different parts of the world since January, 1896, and in a Memorandum it is stated that “there is a general opinion among the Consuls to the effect that it is necessary for British traders to adapt themselves more to the requirements of their customers.” Among the causes indicated, which tend to place British trade at a disadvantage, is the failure “to adopt the Metric System in calculations of weight, cost, etc.”

12. – The Educational Value of the Proposed Change would be Enormous. All the present incongruous tables of Imperial weights and measures, and all the compound arithmetic they involve would be discarded. Decimal fractions would then be taught in the simplest way, immediately after the simple rules of addition, subtraction, &c. The metric weights and measures would then be taken as examples for these rules, and the whole system would be easily understood and learnt quickly. This is no mere opinion, it is what is done in France, Germany and other metric countries.

18. – A large number of Head Masters of schools have reported that, if the metric weights and measures were adopted, scholars would save several months, some say years, of useless teaching, and that this time saved could be devoted to the better teaching of more advanced arithmetic, or to other subjects.

14. – Following the recommendations of the Select Committee of 1895, the scholars in public elementary schools are now taught the principles of the metric system. The requirements of the Education Code are that :-

“The Scholars in Standards V, VI and VII should know the principles of the metric system and be able to explain the advantages to be gained from uniformity in the method of forming multiples and sub-multiples of the unit.”

But after carrying out these instructions for some years the teachers are now confronted with the difficulty that the scholars continue to learn two systems of weights and measures, whereas only one is in use for ordinary purposes. On this account several School Inspectors do not even trouble to examine in the metric system, although the scholars have been prepared for it.

15. – The importance of the question is fully recognised by the National Union of Teachers, who have passed strong resolutions in favour of the Metric System. The Association of Technical Institutions has also shown sympathy with the movement.

16. – The Trades and Labour Councils have shown themselves strongly in favour of the proposed change. In addition to the Trades Councils which have signified their approval, favourable resolutions have been passed at two of the Trades Union Congresses. Representatives of several Trades and Labour Councils attended a deputation to the Board of Trade on this question, 22nd March, 1899, and made stirring speeches, pressing the President of the Board of Trade to assist in bringing about the reform.

17. – The Select Committee in 1895 received from numerous Corporations, School Boards, and other public bodies, resolutions in favour of the Metric System, and none against it.

18. – The Incorporated Society of Inspectors of Weights and Measures has taken up the matter, and warmly supports the proposed change.

19. – The London Association for the Protection ot Trade, the Metropolitan Grocers and Provision Dealers’ Association, the Edinburgh Merchants’ Association, The National Chamber of Trade Hull, the Hull Guardian Society, the Association of Trade Protection Societies, the Manchester Guardian Society, the Munster Merchants’ Association, and the Rochdale Merchants’ and Tradesmen’s Association, all representing retailers rather than merchants, have shown themselves decidedly in favour of the change; and similar institutions in Heckmondwike, Wimbledon, Southam, Bolton, Merthyr Tydvil, and elsewhere have passed resolutions approving the adoption of the Metric Weights and Measures.

20. – In Liverpool the Cotton Association, the Corn Trade Association, the General Brokers’ Association, the Salt Chamber of Commerce, the Shipowners’ Association, the West India Association, the Woolbrokers’ Association, the Warehouse Association, the Provision Trade Association, and the Iron and General Metal Trades Section of the Liverpool Chamber of Commerce, have all expressed themselves in favour of the recommendations of the Select Committee of the House of Commons.

21. – At the Coronation Conference of Colonial Premiers held in London, July, 1902, a resolution in favour of the adoption of the metric weights and measures throughout the British Empire was passed. There is a strong body of public opinion in favour of the reform throughout the Empire, and it is recognised that a compulsory law is necessary to accomplish this.

22. – The Council of the Institute of Chartered Accountants, 8th July, 1903, passed a resolution strongly supporting the introduction of the metric weights and measures.

23. – In November, 1903, the Council of the Society of Accountants and Auditors passed a resolution to the effect that the Society is of opinion that the metric system should be adopted as the legal standard for the United Kingdom.

Explaining the simplicity of the metric system to those that it described as being “under the wrong impression that there is something difficult about it”, was an important aspect of the Decimal Association’s campaign.

Reasons Why′s summary of the metric system was so concise and simple that it could be understood in a matter of minutes. It would have made a big impression on anyone who had had the misfortune to have to learn the numerous measurement units and conversion tables in everyday use before the metric system.

Two-thirds of a page was sufficient to contain practically all that was needed to use the system in everyday life.

METRIC WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.

There is no need of elaborate Tables; for all practical purposes we need only the following :—

Length. The METER, divided into 1,000 millimeters.
  Note.- The Meter can be squared for measures of surface, or cubed for measures of bulk or volume, just as yards or feet are squared or cubed.

Capacity. The LITER (pronounced leeter) divided into deciliters.

Weight. The KILO divided into 1,000 grams.

USEFUL RELATIONS OF METRIC UNITS.

One cubic centimeter of water (at its maximum density) weighs one gram, and 1,000 cubic centimeters or one liter of water weigh 1,000 grams, or one kilo. Hence one cubic meter of water contains 1,000 liters, and weighs 1,000 kilos, or one (metric) ton.

On the subject of the transition period needed, the pamphlet states the following:

The Period of Transition from our old weights and measures to those of the Metric System must necessarily be attended with some inconvenience; but the general feeling of the Chambers of Commerce, of the leading School Boards, and of a large number of public bodies and individuals throughout the country is certainly in favour of a short shrift, as in Austria, Germany, and other countries. To prolong the period of transition beyond the two years recommended by the Select Committee would be unnecessary, and would he a mistake.

 
More than half of the pamphlet is devoted to evidence in support of metrication in the form of extracts from British Consular Reports. These are reproduced in full as follows:

EXTRACTS FROM BRITISH CONSULAR REPORTS.

ROTTERDAM, 22nd October, 1894. — “The simplicity of the Decimal System is so obvious, that its adoption in England cannot fail to be of great advantage to all interested in the Trade with those Countries where it already is in vogue.”

MILAN, ITALY, 18th October, 1894. — “As an Engineer of some 20 years’ residence upon the Continent I have no hesitation whatever in stating that the present system of English Weights and Measures is detrimental to British Commercial interests in countries like this, where the Decimal and Metrical system is in force.

The sooner the Decimal System is adopted by Great Britain the more advantageous for her commercial interests when trading with the Continent in particular, as also to facilitate home calculations, especially in Engineering Departments, where excessive accuracy is an absolute necessity.”

VARNA, 23rd October, 1894. — “If the quotations and specifications in Trade Lists are made out in English Standards of Weights and Measures, intending purchasers here generally throw them aside and consult others which give the required information in metres, kilogrammes, &c.

In the Varro Trade Report for 1892 it is mentioned that it is especially in Hardware and Machinery that the non adoption of the Metrical System acts most prejudicially against British manufactured goods.

Commission agents here have repeatedly told me that though they represent British Firms also, they have, when a customer requires precise data as to the working and capabilities of a machine, to refer to some rival foreign maker’s catalogue, with the result that the order is often placed with the latter.

Not long ago a man came to me with the price list of a British machinery maker, and I converted for him the specifications into their metrical equivalents. He then said that the machine in question seemed just what he wanted, and that he would order one for trial, and give repeat orders if it turned out satisfactory. Meeting him again some time after he told me that although he would have preferred buying the English machine, he had imported one of German make, firstly because he could not be bothered with recurring calculations based on an unfamiliar system, and secondly, because the measurements did not properly coincide with his existing machinery plant of Continental make.”

CONSTANTINOPLE, October 22nd, 1894. — “There is no doubt that the complicated and puzzling system of weights and measures still obtaining in England is long out of date, and has become more and more of an anachronism as England has increased her foreign trade.

Personally I have, during my long official career, seen so frequently the inconvenience of the old system that I have for very many years been a convert to the ideas of your Association.”

ROUEN, October 24th, 1894. — “Within the past 16 years I have served as H.M.’s Consul in three countries using the Metric and Decimal Systems, and I have not infrequently had occasion to observe the maze into which an English trade prospectus or circular, if drawn up only on the British system, throws a foreigner accustomed from childhood to the perfect simplicity of the Metric System. And there is no doubt in my mind that the uncertainty and confusion thus created at times lead to the rejection, by a would-be purchaser, of a British manufacturer’s circular or offers of sale.

The British Customs Tariff is a model of brief simplicity, and yet we are often called upon to explain it. Within the past month I have been asked to explain ‘what a duty of 14/6 a gallon means’, and what is 7/- a cwt. for Dried Fruit? That is to say, what are their equivalents in Metric Weights and Measures and Decimal Currency. Foreign exporters to the United Kingdom would be thankful for a simple table of the British Customs Tariff in which the equivalent duties and units of Continental Metric Systems were shown in parallel columns beside our own.”

FLUSHING, October 20th, 1894. — “The adoption of the Metric System of Weights and Measures in Great Britain and her Dependencies would, to my conviction, greatly benefit English manufacturers and tradesmen, and would certainly contribute to facilitate and extend business with this country.”

MARSEILLES, October 23rd, 1894. — “Very often French merchants have complained of the great difficulty they had in reducing English Weights or Measures into those of the Metric System; and I have not the slightest doubt that if the said system were adopted in England it would greatly facilitate trade with this country.”

ALGIERS, October 24th, 1894.—”I have no doubt whatever that our antiquated and most irrational system has had an injurious effect wherever it has been employed”

VIENNA, October 26th, 1894. — “I believe the adoption of the Metric System of Weights and Measures in Great Britain and her Dependencies would highly benefit English importers and exporters.”

MALAGA, October 23rd, 1894. – “I have heard purchasers here say that they bought German goods in preference to English ones because German merchants sent out their Price Lists made out with the prices in Spanish Currency and Weights according to the Metric System, whereas the British Merchant always sent his made out according to English Weights and Currency

I consider that British trade with Spain would increase if we adopted the Metric System.”

CHERBOURG, October 27th, 1894. – “I am convinced that a Metrical System of Measurement and a Decimal System of Coinage were established in England it would materially benefit British trade, especially with countries such as France, where those systems are adopted.”

LISBON, October 24th, 1894. – “I am of opinion that our industries are materially handicapped in the competition with foreign manufacturers by the isolation of our system of Weights and Measures.

The small tradesmen are therefore the real representatives of trade abroad, or at all events are fast becoming so. We should therefore cater to their requirements, and cultivate their custom, for their friendship to the full extent of the word is of ‘value’ to us.

In this regard I think I may safely say that to the tradesmen of foreign countries our system of Weights and Measures is a constant stumbling block, and acts as a deterrent. Not one in a thousand understands it, and rather than suffer the perplexity of it, or risk the loss that an erroneous computation would entail, pass on to our neighbours, who speak and write to him in his native language of Metres and Kilos. He thereby knows what he buys, knows what he has to clear through the Custom House without risk of fine or forfeiture, and knows the length and cube which leaves him a profit when he sells.

For these reasons I doubt not but that we lose in the aggregate much valuable trade.”

ROUSTCHUK, BULGARIA, November 19th, 1894. – “I know of cases where British trade has suffered because English goods offered for sale here have been made to English instead of Metric Weights and Measures.

In Textiles all the British firms having establishments here have found it to their interests to have their pieces measured in Manchester, a labelled there to a scale of Metres. Woollen Cloths mostly come from Germany. An importer for whom I had obtained samples of Scotch Tweeds informed me that he found so much bother about the calculations that no business resulted.

Since the Bulgarian Government adopted the Metric System it is evident that the Metre has a great advantage; and it is a fact that British imports have fallen off, while Austrian and German have increased.”

LEGHORN, November 16th, 1894. – “I have personally had one practical experience of the drawbacks of our system of measures. The Italian Customs Duty on spirits in bottles is fixed for bottles con half-a-litre or a litre. Any quantity between the two pays duty as for a litre bottle. The ordinary English bottle contains less than a litre and consequently there is an unnecessary loss in the duty paid on all bottles imported.

The leading English Merchants here whom I have consulted on the subject are all of opinion that the introduction into England of a Metrical System of Weights and Measures would greatly tend to benefit English commerce abroad. Indeed, so self-evident are the advantages of the system, that its adoption in England can only be regarded as a matter time.”

BAHIA, November 23rd, 1894. – “After careful consideration I have to state as follows :—

Question No. 1. – “Decidedly in many cases English Exporters find themselves handicapped by their quotations being made in English Weights and Measures, and as a proof of the preference buyers here have for the Metric System, I may mention that all goods imported to this place are marked in yards and metres, and in lbs. and kilos where weights are requisite.”

Question No. 2. – “Dealers here will often throw down an English catalogue or price list owing to the difficulty they experience in calculating the cost of goods per metre or per kilo, when the quotations are made per yard or pound.”

Question No. 3. – “Whether English trade would benefit by the adoption in England of Metric Weights and Measures, I am hardly able to state, the question being one of pure competition, but that the opportunity and facility for competing with foreign trade would be better I feel quite assured.”

TURIN, January 1st, 1895. – “Several cases of misunderstanding between English and Italian firms have been caused by the difference of the Systems of Weights and Measures. Many Italian merchants find a great difficulty in making up the reduction of their invoices into the English System, and also in understanding the invoices of English merchants. The Decimal system is so plain and generally used that I strongly hope to see it adopted as soon as possible.”

TOKIO, December 19th, 1894. – “I believe most confidently that the adoption of Metric Weights and Measures for English manufactures would be of benefit so far as regards their import into Japan.”

TENERIFFE, September 10th, 1896. – “The customer, instead of seeking firms to whom to give his orders, now has the goods of other countries brought daily cleverly to his immediate notice by adroit commercial travellers or by extensive catalogues, in the which he understands, which give him every particular of the article he wants in the weights and measures and currency of his own country. What English firms carry commercial enterprise to this extent? Some doubtless do; the great majority do not. But these things must now be done, and many others, unless we are willing to give up without a struggle our well-earned commercial and industrial supremacy.”

SOFIA, October 14th, 1896. – “I have several times referred in previous reports to the difficulties which arise, to hindrance of commerce, in consequence of the obstinacy of Great Britain in adhering to its antiquated system of weights and measures and money.”

BREST, October 19th, 1896. – “The advantages ot the Metric System are recognised by all, and, were it adopted in England, the British tradesman would greatly benefit by it in his transactions with France, as, at present, a Frenchman will not take the trouble to calculate the value of English Weights and Measures into French equivalents. Hence no business is done.”

BORDEAUX, October 20th, 1896. – “If the views of the Decimal Association were adopted by our legislative authorities, they would, I believe, greatly contribute towards facilitating, and consequently towards extending, British commercial relations with foreign countries.”

BOSTOCK, October 20th, 1896. – “I can only say that if such a measure as the Metric Weights and Measures Bill be adopted compulsorily, it would be greatly beneficial to all who have to do business with Great Britain, and also to all British subjects who have to do business with the Continent.”

BERNE, October 21st, 1896. – “In transacting my official business I have frequently observed that the present English system of weights and measures is certainly detrimental to British trade in my Consular district. I should, therefore, strongly urge and advocate the compulsory adoption of the metric weights and measures in Great Britain and Ireland.”

BREMEN, October 22nd, 1896. – “I can confirm that, for instance measuring cotton prints in yards, and laying the cloth in folds of yards, simply ruins exportations of British manufactures to countries of the metric system, because the retailer who has ultimately to distribute the manufactures has to sell by the meter.”

VIENNA, October 22nd, 1896. – “I do not hesitate to follow the recommendation of the Select Committee that the adoption of the metric system should be compulsory, as I can only see beneficial results arising therefrom for British foreign trade.”

MADRID, October 25th, 1896, – “You have my sincerest sympathy in your endeavours to make the metric system compulsory in England. The numerous advantages of such a system are obvious, and, moreover, its adoption would greatly facilitate the commercial relations of Great Britain with the rest of Europe.”

SEVILLE, October 30th, 1896. – “I heartily sympathise with the objects of your Association, and in many commercial reports have drawn attention to the loss of British trade through tendering by British weights and measures.”

KIEL, November 12th, 1896. – “The inconvenience which was felt when the change was made in this country was soon overcome, and the reform met with universal appreciation.”

AMOY, November 17th, 1896. – “For many years I have been convinced that the introduction of the decimal system into our weights, measures, and money would effect an immense saving of labour, and would vastly increase the wealth of our country, and that it would greatly facilitate the sale of our commodities to foreign countries. I am very rejoiced that an Association has been formed to educate public opinion at home as to the advantages of the decimal system, and to bring the matter to the cognizance of our Government.”

VERA CRUZ, December 3rd, 1896. – “The compulsory use of metric weights and measures with regard to British goods exported to foreign countries, and their use in quotations and advertisements in such goods, in lieu of Imperial weights and measures, would greatly tend to the benefit of British export trade.”

ANTOFAGOSTA, January 9th, 1897. – “Fully convinced by experience of same in this country that decimal coinage and metric weights and measures are the simplest and most convenient of all systems in existence – facilitating the every-day calculations of all, from the banker to the very humblest in life – I shall have great pleasure in backing, so far as lies in my power, the endeavours of your body towards the worthy object it has in view.”

FROM THE FOREIGN OFFICE, LONDON.
November 17th, 1896. – “I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to inform you that a dispatch has been received from Her Majesty’s Agent and Consul-General at Cairo. Lord Cromer considers that a very general opinion undoubtedly exists in Egypt that British trade with that country would benefit by the adoption of the metric system of weights and measures.”

AMSTERDAM, April, 1898, – “At the risk of being considered a pessimist I can but again and again point out the rapidly increasing necessity of adopting the metric system in measurement and prices.

Competition with foreign countries must be met by new measures and methods, otherwise Great Britain must lose ground, and must eventually lag sadly behind in the race.”

CHRISTIANIA, May, 1898. – “I think the trade between Great Britain and Norway would be greatly facilitated if the United Kingdom adopted the decimal system in money, weights, and other measures.”

BOSNIA, August, 1898. – “English firms must make up their minds to adopt the metric system in their dealings with foreigners.”

FROM THE REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMISSIONER APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF TRADE TO REPORT UPON BRITISH TRADE IN CERTAIN SOUTH AMERICAN COUNTRIES

BUENOS AIRES, August 18th. 1898, – “The want, in Great Britain, of the use of the metric system, which is the basis of the great bulk of first hand business here, is undoubtedly a great drawback to British trade especially in estimates for engineering work and such like.”

FROM THE BOARD OF TRADE JOURNAL (OFFICIAL)
For December 1898

LOSS OF TRADE THROUGH THE NON-ADOPTION OF THE METRIC SYSTEM.

“The Board of Trade have received information that a large amount of iron-work for bridges in Norway has been ordered from Antwerp. The contractors state that they would gladly have placed the order in England, but have lately gone over to order all their iron from the Continent, because they cannot get English makers to supply the work according to the metric system, and it is too complicated for them to work it all out into English measurement, feet and inches.”

In the Board of Trade Journal of 15th February, 1900, a report was published which had been forwarded to the Wolverhampton Chamber of Commerce by the British Consul at Amsterdam. This report dealt with the commercial value of the Metric System, with special reference to the classification of German iron manufactures, and the following extracts will be read with interest :—

“The Iron and Steel Manufacturers’ Unions of Germany have adopted a uniform system of dimensions (based on Metric Weights and Measures) …. The classifications are making more and more progress in Germany, not in the iron trades alone, but in other manufactures …. In the future, Germany and the Continent generally will have a constantly increasing advantage over British manufactures in foreign countries, unless the Metric System be fully and entirely adopted by Great Britain. I may instance as an undoubted fact that the preference which Germany has obtained here over Great Britain as regards railway bridges and other railway material is mainly owing to the existence of this Metric classification.”

In July, 1900, Part I, of a Report was issued by the Foreign Office which contained the replies of Her Majesty’s Representatives in Europe to a circular addressed to them by the Marquis of Salisbury, asking for information as to the actual experience of nations which had adopted the Metric System. The replies showed that in all cases the change was made without much difficulty, that there had never been any desire to return to the former system in use, and that the adoption of the Metric System had assisted in the development of the trade of the countries which had adopted it. Part II., issued in February, 1901, shows that in several other countries the change has had beneficial results.

EXTRACTS FROM CONSULAR REPORTS – (Continued)

DUNKIRK, May, 1901. – “The introduction of the metric system of weights and measures would, I think, help our manufacturers to hold their own in the increasing competition for trade, for buyers are much annoyed when they have to convert their orders from the metric system into our complicated weights and measures. A short time ago a large order was sent to a British firm, but as metrical weights and measures were given, it was returned with the request that, to have it executed, the buyers must reduce them into English weights and measurements. Comment upon this is scarcely necessary,”

BAHIA (Brazil), August, 1901. – “I have seen orders given to our competitors which were intended for British firms, solely owing to the difficulty experienced by foreigners in turning British liquid measures into their equivalents in those used in his country.”

MEXICO, August, 1901. – “Still another point that deserves the attention of the British trader in general, is the failure to give estimates or descriptions when asked for. In such cases an order may depend upon a full and intelligible description being given to the would-be customer in the weights and measures of the metrical system that is now so universally accepted.”

BOULOGNE, (Letter from British Consul to Secretary of Decimal Association, 4th November, 1901.) – “Weights and measures, rather than coinage, keep us out of touch with foreigners.”

HAMBURG, November 11th, 1901. – “The introduction of the metric weights and measures for the United Kingdom is urgently necessary in the interests of many branches of British commerce, but I am perfectly certain that its general adoption would soon be appreciated as a great boon by all classes of the population. I passed some years in Germany when the metric system was introduced, and I can say from my own experience that it was quite astonishing how quickly and smoothly the adoption of the new system was carried out.”

TRIESTE, November 13th, 1901. – “I sincerely trust that the measures you have in view will be adopted; which in my opinion will undoubtedly greatly assist, British Commerce abroad.”

CHILI, December, 1901. – “The average ignorance of the metric system on the part of British people is unfortunate. The metric system should be thoroughly taught in every school in the British Empire. Without a good and conversational knowledge of foreign languages and a perfect understanding of the metric system and foreign monies we are poorly equipped for attacking foreign markets.”

CORUNNA, March, 1902. – “If manufacturers desire even to retain the position they now hold, they must endeavour to give quicker and cheaper delivery, and bring their catalogues up to date by changing the antiquated system of weights and measures, thereby making them intelligible to foreigners.”

STOCKHOLM, March, 1902. – “Among other things the adoption of the metric system in the United Kingdom continues to be most desirable. As an example of the benefits of good education, it ought to be remembered how easily it was introduced into all three Scandinavian countries.”

CALLAO, November 24th, 1902. – “I entirely concur in the necessity of discarding, with as little delay as possible, the inconvenient weights and measures which are in use at present, inasmuch as they are undoubtedly a serious hindrance to the transaction of business between the British Empire and Foreign Countries.”

FRANKFORT, July, 1903 (No. 3042.) — “The advantages which would accrue to the exporters of British goods, if the decimal system were adopted for the export at least of such goods as go to countries enjoying the decimal system of weights and measures, have been repeatedly demonstrated. Generally speaking it is clear that the more intimately this system is connected with the habits and customs of the people, the more difficult will, in days of close competition, be the sale of goods differently weighed and measured.”

SARDINIA, December, 1903 (No. 3110.) — “Though in 1902 too, the United Kingdom has heen foremost among the nations in the imports into the province of Cagliari, that is merely due to the amount of coal entered, as there still is but a trifling trade in British industrial products, which once was of great importance.

The principal causes of the fall are:— the heavy duties imposed on British industrial imports; the successful competition of other countries, especially of Germany and France; the refusal of British manufacturers, traders and merchants to use the decimal system for weights and measures for the sales here.”

By 1904, the amount of evidence that was being reported from all around the world was becoming overwhelming – the continued failure to use the metric system for manufacturing and trade was costing the country dear.

References

Decimal Association – Letter to Professor Foxwell, St.John’s College, Cambridge.
https://library.kwansei.ac.jp/archives/keizaishokan/foxwell/document_pdf/262/687_001.pdf

Observant readers might have noticed white pillars with blue bands and red reflector strips along the edges of motorways and on certain dual carriageway A-roads. These are called location marker posts. Some might have also noticed blue signs with the road number and other information along England’s (but not Scotland’s, Wales’s or Northern Ireland’s) roads. These are called driver location signs. They are to the road engineers what postcodes are to the postal service.

Location marker posts are at 100 metre intervals and are used by road maintenance and emergency services to pinpoint locations on the road that might need attention or the location where motorists might be stranded (The picture below taken at kilometre 2.8 on the M27 shows a location marker post, a driver location sign and an emergency telephone).

Prior to the turn of the millennium, motorists who were in trouble would (and still can) telephone the highways control room using emergency telephones. The closest location marker number (028 in this case) was encoded into the telephone number. With the advent of the mobile phone, drivers in trouble resorted to calling 999 from their mobile phones, so driver location signs were installed to help them communicate their positions to the relevant emergency service. The information on the driver location sign duplicated and extended the information on the marker posts. The road number is obvious and the “B” in the picture refers to the carriageway (“A” and “B” are in the direction of increasing and decreasing distances respectively. Slip roads have letters “J”, “K”, “L” and “M”).

A decade ago, the Highways Agency (as it then was) started producing maps showing the relationship between driver location signs and motorway junctions. The Map for the M25 (see below) has been published and is reproduced here under the Open Government Licence scheme. Similar maps exist, but have not yet been published, though some have been leaked to the UKMA.

When I have spoken to people about driver location signs, the usual response that I get is “uh-what?”  Clearly the public is unaware of these signs. This means that should they be involved in an incident they could well have trouble communicating their location when using a mobile phone to contact the emergency services.

Letter to the Minister

About two months ago, a UKMA member wrote to the minister via their MP, drawing attention to this with particular reference to the ambulance service. As everybody is aware, the ambulance service is under extreme pressure, and to quote a well-known supermarket, “Every little helps.”.  The minister replied that the signs were “primarily for the benefit of organisations such as the emergency services and National Highways, rather than the general public.”  He failed to address the issue of how a stranded member of the public should communicate their location to the emergency services. The minister went on to say that driver locations signs were not in the highway code – something which is patently wrong – See Rule 277 of the 2023 version of the Highway Code. He mentioned the e-Call device, which is now mandatory in vehicles manufactured in or after 2018, but failed to clarify that it will be a number of years before most of the cars on British roads are equipped with this device. The Minister’s reply is shown below.

After receiving his response, the UKMA member pointed out the factual errors to the minister via their MP, but the only response they got was from their MP saying that he was sorry that they were not happy with the minster’s response.

Breakdown on the A43

A few days before I sat down to write this blog article, my wife and I had the misfortune to suffer gearbox problems when travelling northwards on the A43. I was able to coax the car into a layby on the Silverstone bypass from where I phoned the AA. The bypass had a marker post showing that it was at “kilometre 42.4”.  There was also a stone to commemorate the opening of the by-pass. I gave all the usual information to the AA and, apart from quoting the values on the marker post, I described my position using miles from Northampton and the fact that we were between Towcester and Silverstone.

After about three hours, the driver of an AA patrol van phoned us and when I described our location, he said that he was 30 miles away! It took another hour and was getting dark before he finally arrived. While we were driving to a point where he could drop us off, I asked him about location marker posts. He told me that he never used them.

What is the Government’s problem?

Why is the government reluctant to publicise the existence of driver location signs on motorways? Is it because they are in kilometres and the government fears that there will be an outcry if this fact is publicised? If so, then they are over-reacting – most people in the UK probably couldn’t care less, after all, how many people insisted on keeping “six feet apart” rather than “two metres apart” during the COVID lockdown? Although driver location signs, like post codes, are there to assist the relevant professionals, in both instances the public needs to use them to communicate critical information to the professionals. Finally, this over-reaction, which has been going on for years, is hindering the emergency services including, I believe, the hard-pressed ambulance service. What for? The minister’s ideology?

References:

Driver Location Signs – Frequently Asked Questions: https://web.archive.org/web/20101203121751/http://www.highways.gov.uk/business/16049.htm.

Wikipedia: Driver Location Sign: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Driver_location_sign Highway Code Rule 277: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/the-highway-code/breakdowns-and-incidents-274-to-287)

Sources of Images:

Driver location sign picture: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:M27_DLS_Tel_cropped.jpg

M25 Map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:070921-Final_DLS_map.pdf

Minister’s letter: The author

Version 1.1 edited by goollaDek on Tue Dec 04 11:26:04 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by redlousdrr redlousdrr on Tue Dec 04 10:00:36 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by eljckkexp eljckkexp on Mon Dec 03 22:35:03 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by FeneUndulfure FeneUndulfure on Mon Dec 03 18:51:54 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by xjrrhjpeyqwh xjrrhjpeyqwh on Tue Nov 27 10:29:07 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by KALTEERB KALTEERB on Tue Nov 27 09:54:21 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by FaizanH FaizanH on Tue Nov 27 09:52:30 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by shenauilmn shenauilmn on Tue Nov 27 21:42:08 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by crellali crellali on Tue Nov 27 21:14:50 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by fbhxidsjonbn fbhxidsjonbn on Tue Nov 27 20:10:58 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by assumb assumb on Tue Nov 27 07:51:49 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by horsmoogy horsmoogy on Tue Nov 27 18:15:14 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by SypeLype SypeLype on Tue Nov 27 05:34:02 UTC 2012

Version 1.1 edited by Jobaft Jobaft on Tue Nov 27 16:31:22 UTC 2012