The Somerset reporter., 1900-01-25
For the REPORTER:
Last Year of the Century.

|. As an Illustration of the different views
that may be taken by different people on
the same subject, nothing can be more
amusing than the question of the beginning
OF the twentieth century over which con
troversy has so fiercely ragged during these
later days; and to quote a we'll known
remark, $50 much has been said, and so
well said' that anything further would
seem almost super huous, but the COM
munlcation in the former issue of the
Reporter from DR. w. M. Mclaughlin of
Harmony, written as he says for the pull
pose OF calculating his views of the ques-
ton, has aroused The desire In the mind
of one who holds the opposite view, to
reply to the decisive statement made by
him, that "the nineteenth century is done
and the twentieth century has begun"
showing, in few words, how it looks to
other people.
To simplify matters we quote from DR..
McLaughlin's communication and by his
own words will we Judge him; he says
"When person is 100 years old he is a
century old, is he not? Yes. Well. if a
child is born January I. 1900 after living
one year he would be one year old Ian
uary 1, 1901. On January 1. 1899 he
he would be 90 years old and on January
l, 1900 he certainly would be 100 years
old would he not? Now there can be no
parallel between the year 1900 and the
year 1, as point from which to reckon
years or age; we do not have a decimal
before the year 1, Gas in the number 1900
with its terminal ciphers) to begin our
reckoning from, but commence with that
numeral. Let us suppose child is born
January I, in the year /, with the beginning
of the first century; on Janurry 1. in the
year 2, he would be one year old. on jan
uary l, in the year 100 he would be 90
years old and if he reached the age of 100
Tor century, he must certainly live
until January 1, IoI.
Dr. Mclaughlin says: 1.-The advocates
of the theory that the old century does
not end until January I, 1901, go on the
principle that one year of time must elapse
before the first century could begin"
Not at all. These advocates are aware
that century begins on the first day of
the reckoning OF it, but what they stand
for is not the round number of hundreds,
but the completed century, and they go
on the principle that in order to complete
century, hundred years must elapse
from the time the reckoning of it began,
let the date of that beginning be what it
may.
We do not begin to count with cipher,
but find its place by counting up to the
decimal number 10; and would it not be
well for the earnest disputants OF this
question, to take into account the fact
that the reckoning of the years of the
centuries did not begin with ciphers, but
with the mineral 1, and-while it may
seem to some a mistake and that they
could have done better had they had the
management of things beginning as our
misguided forefathers did with that numer-
al, there is seemingly no other way than
to go on in the regular order in such cases
made and provided. There has never
been known to the writer any better
method of finding the difference between
two dates--or the time that had elapsed
than that OF subtracting the less from the
greater and the most patient and pro-
longed effort over the problem 1000
minus 1, does not give 1900 as the result
Skowhegan, January %, 1900.