The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-06-05
SEATTLE. WEDNESDAY, JUNE !
UNIVERSAL STANDARDS.

The Views of Mr.. +. II. Coudert. the
eminent New York lawyer. on the money
question are OF especial value because he
represents the French government in all
legal matters. 1t is his duty TO watch
legislation affecting the interests of that
country. and he is therefore In the posi-
ton OF an onlooker. who is proverbally
the best Judge OF the game. He only re-
peats what many have said before him,
but he gives the result of observation from
q new standpoint. and confirms what
other observers have seen.
The first sentence he uttered I'm re-
cent interview should be the object of all
agitation. "If the nations OF the world
should agree upon a uniform standard
there is no doubt In my mind that 1t
would be the greatest boon the world of
finance has ever received" 1t is true. as
he says. that the ratio would be OF no
consequence. The universal acceptance
OF the standard would place that ques-
ton out OF all controversy. except that
the nearer the ratio came to the worlds
condition the less need there would be
of an alteration In a few years.
Uniformity of standard will become an
absolute commercial necessity. When
this was advocated as the great desider-
atun in the columns of the Post-Inteni-
gencer week or so ago correspond
ent asked why there should be a universal
standard OF value any more tnan OF
quantity. The very patent reoly TO this
is that there is TO reason why civilized
nations should not adopt uniform stand
ards. A standard is not like a policy.
Self-interest suggests that the protection
of home industries will tend TO the pros
perity OF this country: a policy may be
for the benefit OF the nation adopting IL
but be TO the detriment of other nations.
II is not so with a standard, and II we
seem TO be uttering merely primitive
truths il Is because letters which reach
this paper show that an occasional recur-
renee TO primary principles is not labor
thrown away.
There IS no reason why twelve inches
should not be regarded as a foot all the
world oyer. or that the metric system
should not be generally adopted. It Is
OF no consequence what the quantity Is.
SO that It Is generally agreed upon.
The growing trade between the United
States and the South American republics
IL bringing this subject prominently for
ward. and competition will compel aban-
donment OF the presen; system Of weights
and measures. whose chief purpose seems
20 be 20 promote fraud. The simple
standard OF American weight is one
pound. The nearest metric equivalent is
1Io93 pound. Nearly every American re
public has a different commercial stand
ard. The following gives a fair example
OF the absurdity: Argentina. ioi21 pound !.
Central America. los. Chile lot. Mex
Eco, i.oltt5. Peru. LOIS. Venezuela. iol5l.
In Portugal Il is 10t. In Greece. IL:
Japan. ISl. China. 1855 Ia. Java. Is.
The same may De said Of land measures
and all other artificial means 6y which
quantity may be described by signs OF
words. There Is no branch Of commerce
IN which the world has progressed so
slowly and held on So tenaciously 70 Gus
tom. The worlds markets are coming
closer together. and the tricks Of odd
weigh IS viii no longer bo available. The
margin 81 profit everywhere 5 being re-
daced. and competition Will compel a
least superficial appearance OF hon
ssty.
50 far from there being less need ~ a
universal standard OF measures than OF
values. there Is an even greater need
and the possibility OF Il IS UNNECESSARILY
greater.