The Metric Fallacy?

By The Metric Maven

Bulldog Edition

The Notable Names Database (NNDB) is supposedly a Who’s Who for the 21st Century. When I input metric system reformer John Shafroth (1854-1922) into it, there was no entry. However, when I input Frederick A. Halsey (1856-1935), an entry immediately presented itself. What was Halsey’s seminal achivement? According to NNDB he: “Kept America safe from the metric system.”

Here is what the NNDB has to say:

Frederick A. Halsey was a well-known mechanical engineer and served as long-time editor of American Machinist,….

Halsey also represented the National Association of Manufacturers in its successful fight against adoption of the metric system in America in 1902. Fifteen years later he was a founding member of the American Institute of Weights and Measures, an industry group established to fight the next attempt to block (sic i.e. implement) metrics.

The entry does not mention the publication of his work The Metric Fallacy in 1904. This monograph was produced as a rebuttal to the assertions made by John Shafroth and other metric advocates of the time. A main thesis of this work appears to be: “Despite what all the metric countries assert, none of them have gone metric. They simply continue to use their old systems, and claim to be metric.” Even the French have not made the change to the metric system he asserts. Halsey lists 43 countries that claimed to have embraced the metric system, all of them are apparently delusional, and closet Imperial system users. None is metric. The metric system does not exist in these countries, it’s all a big cover-up. The evidence offered by Halsey is a number of letters he received from residents of those countries.

The assertion that none of these 43 metric countries were actually using metric, made me think about the Apollo program, and our landing on the moon. It was one of the great achievements of humankind. The entire world watched as Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin became the first men on the moon. Yet, there are a number of people who have become obsessed with the idea that the moon landing never happened. This idea is prevalent enough that Mythbusters had an episode where they tackled the Moon Landing Hoax, yet for the people who believe the moon landing never happened, no amount of evidence will suffice. For them, no human has set foot on the lunar surface, and for Halsey, 46 metric countries are not metric—not a single one.

During the metric hearings of the early 1900s, this exchange between John F. Shafroth and Frederick Halsey occurred:

Mr Shafroth: Has any other country adopted our system?

Mr Halsey: It is spreading all over the world.

The history of the twentieth century demonstrates the “fallacy” of Frederick Halsey’s assertion. No metric country, has introduced, or passed, legislation to embrace Imperial measurement and abandon metric. It was the case in Halsey’s time, and is true to this day. By the end of 20th century, only the US, and two small countries would be non-metric. Of the 195 countries in the world, 192 use the metric system today.

Halsey didn’t just assert that metric countries were not metric, he attacked the notion that decimal arithmetic is superior to fractions! Modern usage of the metric system has nearly eliminated the use of decimal points for almost all everyday work. Housing construction is done all in millimeters, therefore decimal points are almost completely eliminated. When I cook, I measure in grams and milliliters, and almost never have the need for a decimal point. If, as I’ve proposed, we changed temperature from Celsius (centigrade) to milligrade, the decimal point would be eliminated for everyday temperature measurement. I’m curious what Halsey would say to the ability of the modern metric system (SI) to eschew the decimal point entirely.

In an echo of the absurd, obtuse, and duplicitous contemporary claims made by NASA and Government contractors, Halsey claims the metric countries cannot get metric fasteners and have to turn to English speaking countries as there is no alternative!

Halsey uses the tried and true polemical method of converting inch standards to metric values, then pointing with horror that they are unusual numbers that no one could memorize. He does not mention the obvious, that metric standards would be in whole numbers, because they would be created using that system. For instance M5, M6 and M7 screws each have 5, 6, and 7 mm diameter respectively, not some strange English size converted into metric. No decimals, no fractions, just whole numbers.

Halsey attacks the simplicity of using millimeters and offers a mm rule as an example:

This is not a mm rule, it is a centimeter rule, with millimeter graduations between. Halsey, the editor of American Machinist, can’t tell this difference? If it were a mm ruler (which is all I recommend—no centimeters–ever!) each of the values would be multiplied by ten. The 100 mm ruler of the illustration should read 10, 20, 30 …to 90. Paraphrasing a famous Australian celebrity: “That’s not a millimeter scale, this is a millimeter scale:”

Australian Millimeter Ruler — Click to enlarge

One might legitimately question both Halsey’s expertise with metric and his credibility as a detractor when observing his mm ruler example.

As those who read this blog know, I would do away with centimeters. The ruler presented by Halsey is the reddest of red herrings. It is far simpler than a common American ruler which has multiple fractional scales, but it has two scales, which is an unnecessary complication. We only need one scale, in millimeters.

The meter is asserted to be an inaccurate standard by Halsey, even thought the Mendenhall Order, occurred in 1893, about ten years before the metric hearings took place. This order stated that the accuracy and utility of imperial  standards were so bad, they were essentially unusable.  Imperial units would instead have to be defined in terms of metric standards. The metric standards were provided to us because the US had signed the Treaty of the Meter in 1878.

Halsey further claims that there is no confusion in imperial weights and measures. Really? I’ve blogged about this so much, my fingers hurt. The tangled prose of this book are an example of circular confusion. Halsey offers up the fact that dozens and dozens of units are used in imperial, and that can be confusing, but the answer is to keep all the “correct” imperial units, and abolish the old ones–somehow–without any laws. If we add metric units, Halsey claims, we will have metric units and all the old ones, which will be even more units in total. This would be even more confusing! He does not seem to realize that metric is designed to replace all the old measurements—and perhaps we could use the same magical method Halsey would employ to get rid of the archaic imperial units, which would leave us with metric alone. It is sad to think that the confused, circular, and obtuse “reasoning” found in this ossified polemic, was able to quash metrication in the US in 1904. We all pay for his “victory” over metric every day. Many just don’t know it.

There is a strange reverberation, of modern day metric denialists in Halsey’s prose. In The Metric Fallacy he gushes over a new computational device:

It performs all the ordinary calculations of life, except addition and subtraction, so quickly that there is nothing left for the metric system to save.

This new hi-tech device of 1904 is of course, the  slide rule, about which Halsey also wrote a book in 1899. Halsey’s claim has a historical resonance with current  US anti-metric arguments I hear. It is claimed that because we have computers to convert back and forth, that changing to the metric system in the US  is of no value.

This misses the point. Metric is easier and more accurate to visualize and use. It’s the disadvantages of the current set of imperial intellectual “tools,” when compared to those of metric, which is the problem, not the conversion between them. They are not equal systems. Imperial is not even a system! Using computers to convert between Roman Numerals and Arabic ones, does not negate that fact that the former are cumbersome and inefficient and the latter are streamline and efficient. Roman Numerals–forget them! Who in their right mind would do computations with them?—even with the aid of a computer!

Halsey also seems to conveniently forget that slide rules use decimal numbers–which he railed against. It is a strange omission for a man who wrote a book on slide rules.

John Shafroth lost the metric conversion battle of the early twentieth century. The victor, Frederick Halsey, has “kept America safe from the metric system,” for over 100 years and counting. I guess I can only be thankful that he didn’t also decide to save us from Arabic Numerals or flush toilets.

Related Essay:

It’s Deja Vu All Over Again (1916-2016)


If you liked this essay and wish to support the work of The Metric Maven, please visit his Patreon Page and contribute. Also purchase his books about the metric system:

The first book is titled: Our Crumbling Invisible Infrastructure. It is a succinct set of essays  that explain why the absence of the metric system in the US is detrimental to our personal heath and our economy. These essays are separately available for free on my website,  but the book has them all in one place in print. The book may be purchased from Amazon here.


The second book is titled The Dimensions of the Cosmos. It takes the metric prefixes from yotta to Yocto and uses each metric prefix to describe a metric world. The book has a considerable number of color images to compliment the prose. It has been receiving good reviews. I think would be a great reference for US science teachers. It has a considerable number of scientific factoids and anecdotes that I believe would be of considerable educational use. It is available from Amazon here.


The third book is not of direct importance to metric education. It is called Death By A Thousand Cuts, A Secret History of the Metric System in The United States. This monograph explains how we have been unable to legally deal with weights and measures in the United States from George Washington, to our current day. This book is also available on Amazon here.

John F. Shafroth: The Forgotten Metric Reformer

By The Metric Maven

John Franklin Shafroth

June 9th is the birthday of John Franklin Shafroth (1854-1922). When I began researching the history of metrication initiatives in the US, John Shafroth’s name appeared over and over. I had never heard of him. It was ironic to discover he was a resident of “The Mile High City”—Denver Colorado.  Shafroth attempted to legislate the metric system as the standard of weights and measures for the United States. He is on record as supporting mandatory metric conversion bills from at least 1896 to his death in 1922. For twenty six years he did what he could to finally unify the “hammer to fit, paint to match” weights and measures still used in the United States to this day.

Shafroth was a US Representative, Governor and Senator from Colorado. He was able to usher in The National Bureau of Standards, now known as NIST. which earned praise from the President of MIT.

I contacted the three Authors of Honest John Shafroth — A Colorado Reformer. None of them were aware of his work on weights and measurement reform, nor were they surprised he had been involved. Shafroth was immersed in many issues of his day.

Shafroth managed to maintain his reputation at time when his political contemporaries were shown to be as corrupt as the Colorado River is long. When in 1904 Shafroth believed his opponent had won the election, he resigned. This earned him the name “Honest John.” John Shafroth was elected and held office as both a Republican and a Democrat, but could not get the country to adopt the metric system. The Denver Colorado resident was clearly not concerned about the city losing its Mile High prestige. It may be pointed out that the state of Colorado is the only one in which every square millimeter of land is above a kilometer. It is the Kilometer High State. We can replace 5280 by 1000 meters should they need a marketing replacement.

His bill to adopt the metric system was favorably reported by unanimous vote of the House Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures on December 6, 1900. The effective date of when the metric system was to take effect was however moved to January 1, 1903.  Representative Shafroth asserted that “…all the civilized nations except Great Britain and the United States had adopted the metric system, Russia being the last to do so a few weeks ago.”  The New York Times  quoted the wording of the metrication bill on December 7, 1900 in their article, Favor The Metric System:

That on and after Jan. 1, 1903, all the departments of the Government of the United States in the transaction of all business requiring the use of weight and measurement, except in completing the survey of public lands, shall employ and use only the weights and measures of the metric system, and on and after Jan. 1, 1903, the weights and measurements of the metric system shall be the legal standard weights and measures of and in the United States.

The proposed bill never made it to The House floor, and vanished with the adjournment of the 56th Congress. Shafroth would introduce the bill again in the 57th Congress, and again on the first day of the 58th Congress.

Shafroth’s opponents labeled it The Metric “Force'” Bill. The Friday, May 16, 1902 issue of The San Francisco Call offered its view of the metric bill:

…it has become known among the opponents of the system as the “metric force bill,” and a good deal of opposition has been arrayed against it.

It is quite probable that an attempt to bring about the general use of the metric system in this country by a drastic measure of compulsion would be unpopular and would rouse a discontent that would go far to defeat the desired object, but still it is not easy to see how the improvement  can be brought about by any other means. The way to adopt the system is to adopt it, and that can be effected only by governmental action, for it is only through the Government that there can be brought about that wide-spread simultaneous acceptance of the change which is essential to its success. It required legislative act to reform the calendar, to establish a decimal system of currency and to make other improvements of a similar kind. The objection to the so called “force bill” on this subject is therefore invalid. If the metric system be good enough to be adopted at all it should be adopted by law.

While visiting Washington, Lord Kelvin appeared before the house committee and gave a strong endorsement to the bill ...

…when attention is given to the fact that there are in different countries and localities sixty different “inches,” 135 different lengths of the “foot,” 235 different different weights for the “pound,” it will be evident that it would be better for industry and commerce, as well as for science, to have a common uniform system of weights and measurements arranged on the decimal plan and based upon scientific principles….

1902 was the last year metric would be discussed by Congress until the 1920s. Had the Honorable John Shafroth been successful in passing his metric bill, this blog would never have become necessary. The prediction found in The San Fransisco Call proved accurate. Without mandatory legislation—metric conversion would not happen in the United States. It has been 110 years after Rep. Shafroth’s mandatory legislation was submitted, and we still use grains, carats, troy pounds and ounces, as well as avoirdupois pounds and ounces, three different miles: nautical, statute and survey, along with teaspoons and tablespoons much to the detriment of our economic and public health.

In 1902, during metric system hearings, Shafroth initiated this exchange:

Mr. Shafroth. How do you account for the fact, though, that there is not a single country that has adopted the metric system that contemplates adopting the English system?

Mr. Towne. Why should they?

Mr. Shafroth. Does not that show the superiority of the metric system?

Mr. Towne. No, sir; it shows the superiority of an established standard, and no country
in the world has ever had what America has to-day in this respect.

Certainly no other country does—they have more sense. Shafroth’s observation is still correct. No country which has adopted the metric system has ever regretted the change, and switched back. We are still the country who never tried. We are “The Little Engine that Couldn’t.”

The authors of the book Honest John Shafroth had this to say about the hurdles he faced:

“Shafroth’s failure to produce a speedy resolution on the Philippines demonstrated something he already knew: It was much easier for Congress to do nothing than to take action” …..

“Shafroth wanted the the United States to adopt the metric system. The idea died.” (page 102)

When Shafroth was up for reelection in 1918, he had a number of negatives haunting his campaign, and some that the public just didn’t care about. The authors of Honest John Shafroth relate:

 “Nor did most voters take an interest in adoption of the metric system or changing the date of the president’s inauguration, two of the senators pet projects.” (Page 129)

Shafroth would narrowly lose the 1918 election, which ended his political career.

In the map below are the 192 countries who have embraced the metric system as of 2012 in green and the three who have not in grey:

Antarctica is populated with scientists. It is essentially metric

All I can say on this occasion is: “Thank you Mr. Shafroth, thank you for trying so hard not to let your country waste money and lives by not adopting the metric system.”

There is not a Senator or Representative in the US Congress, for whom a change to the metric system is currently an issue.  The late Metrication Enthusiast Pat Naughtin sent letters to every member of the US Congress about the importance of Metric System adoption in 2011. In his newsletter Metrication matters – Number 95 – 2011-04-10, Pat states: “The result: nil, nix, nothing, zero, zilch. Not even a courteous, “We thank you for your letter … ” This has also been my experience when I contacted both my US Senators, my US Representative, and both my State Senator and Representative. .

SearchGovTrack.us indicates that no metric legislation of any kind has been proposed since the 105th Congress (1997-1999). That legislation, like all since 1988 is anti-metric. The only solace I can find is that all the proposed bills died. It’s been at least 13 years of political silence since the last anti-metric intitiative, with no end in sight. It has been over 100 years since John Shafroth did his best to convert the US to the metric system. I suspect that if he knew, Senator Shafroth would find this years’  birthday anything but happy.

Related Essays:

How Did We Get Here?

Testimony from the 1921 Metric Hearings

The Metric Hearings of 1975 — The Limits of Social Norm in Metrication

A Tale of Two Iowans

Australian Metrication & US Procrastination

John Quincy Adams and The Metric System


If you liked this essay and wish to support the work of The Metric Maven, please visit his Patreon Page and contribute. Also purchase his books about the metric system:

The first book is titled: Our Crumbling Invisible Infrastructure. It is a succinct set of essays  that explain why the absence of the metric system in the US is detrimental to our personal heath and our economy. These essays are separately available for free on my website,  but the book has them all in one place in print. The book may be purchased from Amazon here.


The second book is titled The Dimensions of the Cosmos. It takes the metric prefixes from yotta to Yocto and uses each metric prefix to describe a metric world. The book has a considerable number of color images to compliment the prose. It has been receiving good reviews. I think would be a great reference for US science teachers. It has a considerable number of scientific factoids and anecdotes that I believe would be of considerable educational use. It is available from Amazon here.


The third book is not of direct importance to metric education. It is called Death By A Thousand Cuts, A Secret History of the Metric System in The United States. This monograph explains how we have been unable to legally deal with weights and measures in the United States from George Washington, to our current day. This book is also available on Amazon here.