The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1869-09-04 00:00:00

" REPUTED " PINTS AND QUARTS.
(From The Times
' '

Every now and then a short paragraph in our
columns informs the public that certain exceedingly
acute and learned gentlemen have been busily engaged
in establishing or regulating, for the benefit f the
country, some new standard of weight and measure. The
Commission, indeed, haNalready done much in this direc-
tion, but there is a lapse, iiiconceivalde in any count',
except our own, which, to a great extent, renders
their labours absolutely useless. To many people, we
dare say, it will he news to hear that aa Imperial
liquid Measure, with the Imperial " Ohm " for ite
unit, is minimised to govern Al tom dealings in
the way of drink. We give this itifarination as pro-
bably of score, because. if we proceed to ask how
many of our renders ever heart if the tetra "
in their pur..haseg of wine and beer, the answer we
are sure would be eurpriming. It is, him eeer, the
fart that a standard, or Imperial, g aiim, mint:tieing
227-274 cubic inches has been ilafined fin our use, and
its multiple. Or parts are duly ilefined also, bile tomtit
part of a gallon in a quart, the half of a tplart is a pint
and the fourth of a pint is a gill. By gills, pints.
quarts, and gal 1•1116 wears presumed to reckon in buying
wine or beer, and yet it needs no Baying that. WI a rule.
we never do racton by any such measure, lint always
in the term of another thing. which in no measure at
all, and that is a "bottle." What, then, is the gioitl,d ,
our elaborate etandards if our ilimbegs are conducted !
without any reference to them? Ir merchants are to
,ellwiue and titer, not by the gallon or part of a gallon,
but by a measure unrecognised in law and indefinite in
practice, why should the Imperial standard gallon have
been defined at all?
As a matter of history, we see how the confusion
originated. There was a time when wine was drawn
for sale from the cask, insomuch that the waiter at a
tavern WO,l called a "drawee," and, of course, pints,
quarts, and gall' inn then expressed actual measures of
wine. There was also a time, more recent, when beer
was always kept in casks, and when bottled ale wascom•
paratively a rarity. But the introduction of pale ale
and bitter beer has been followed by the use of the
bottle in beer measure also, and, except in large
families, casks of ale are now almost as uncommon as
butts of sherry. In both trades, as a rule, the bottle
is the measure, or presum-d measure, by which we
buy, and yet who can tell us what a "bottle" means?
Originally we suppose the bottle did represent a quart,
and the half-bottle a pint ; but so greatly has the
measure degenerated that six bottles, at least, are
now understood to go to a gallon, instead of four.
It is, we believe, admitted in the wine trade that
the "dozen" of wine ehould contain two gallons, but
even that diminished allowance we take entirely upon
trust, and no one has any assurance that he really gets
a sixth of a gallon in his "bottle" of sherry or claret.
In the muse of beer the corruption of measure became
gradually so outrageous that the public rebelled, and
mime years ago a new delicition was introduced into
the trade which carries absurdity to its utmost heieht.
To save themselves tram the charge of giving short
measure, the dealers openly rejected a fixed standard,
and declared to go upon "repute." You may now
buy the brewage of Bans or Alleopp by the "reputed"
quart or "reputed" pint, but, we should like to
ask, what would be thought if a draper proposed to
sell by the "reputed" yard or a grocer by the "re'
put. "pi lurid ? What is the use of a standard if it is
to be treated thus?
The confusion has been increased to infinity by the
Multiplication of bottles in all shapes and mires. We
now import enormous quantities of wine from all the
wine-growing countries of the globe, and each country
has its own peculiar "bottle," Hock, champagne.
claret, and Burgundy can be recognised at once by the
form of the b.atle in which the wine is contained, and
lately we have hail a fresh specimen of the memoir., in
the " Lottle "of Vienna beer. Of course, we cannot
insist upon uniformity in such supplies, but we can,
and, we venture to add, we should enforce an ad
hermit -e to the legal standard in all bottles manu-
factured for use at home. At any rate, in some way
or other wine and beer, however kept or stored,
should be sold by the lawful measure of the gallon or
its parts. So long as the customer knows how ninny
gi11,,, pints, or quarts he is buyiug the shape of the
vessel matters little ,• but it is, to say the lewt of the
practice, utterly absurd to establish a wellalefined
"Liquid Measure," and then to deal in liquids by a
reckoning having no reference whatever to the
authorised standard.
In the beer trade an "Imperial" quart has actually '
been introduced, out it is charged for as a luxury or
favour wherries the truth is that for " Imperial" we
ought simply to write "legal." An Imperial quart
means only a quart measured according tsi the standard
enacted for the use of the Ein [ire, and what place..
we folk, is there for any other quart beeide it! If
is "reputed" quart were any known or fixed part of
the standard gallon, the cage would be different ; but
that is not the fact. A " reputed " quart is merely
a measure which dims not profens to he the lawful
"ensure, though called by its nanie, and is eta
hri.teni d f r the wile purimrse of .aving the sell r
...Euless when the short memoir., is ilircovered. Bat
his ingenious stratagem is not allowed in arty other
cede. None of the ellopkeapera periodically convicted
.f using short weights Mid WOUI4I be allowed
ty escape 1111111iShIntlit On the allegation that they never
iirofesised to give good weight Cr measure, but went by
the " repute " of the trade, with the full knowledge of
their customers. Only in the came of beer or wine is
this anomaly permitted to endure.

—lt would be impossible, we shall be told, to recast all
the millions I bottles in use. lint it would loit be im-
possible to Dicke no more of them, or to certify what
portico of an Imperial gallon those in use shoal I con-
tain. Suppcse a gill were taken as the unit of capa-
city, and every bottle were held to contain a certain
number of gills. It signifien comparatively little what
terms are used, so long as they have a distiact refer-
nee to a legal standard. What we complain of is, not
the use of the " bottle' " but the use of a measure
o which, under the name f bottle. may be anything the
seller plsa-es. Is it not obvious that, after enaciin.
and cleclaen; • certain standard, the law should en-
force the use of this standard? What in the world
In we gain by our scientific labours in search of an in-
variable standard, if this standard, when at length esta-
blished and defined, may be discarded altogether?
It would take us half a column to explain how
the 'inch" of which the Imperial gallon is
. .

composed has been reached and accepled, but
what has this inch to do with • "bottle ? " We ven-
ture to suggest to our philosopbers who are still
arguing on transcendental principles for the adoption of
a new unit, that it would be better to secure for the
iresent the adoption of the unit in use. A measure,
however it may be d vised, is of no sote if nobody
un-ssures by it, and that is actually the absurdity at
which we have arrived in dealitgs which form a very
nsiderable proportion of the expenditure of every
household.