On Thu, 7 Dec 2000 06:59:27 -0600, Lawrence R Zink wrote:
>
>
>The only reason I can come up with for the differnce is a
speculative one.
>But I think that the differnce was the ability for the English Trading
>companies to make more profit, Sell the Colonist a short gallon for
the
>same price as an Imperial Gallon, automatic 20% profit.
>
Thomas Jefferson was interested in the scientific aspects
of this problem, and was tasked by US Congress in 1790
to report on it. Here is an excerpt:
Measures of capacity
The gallon contains:
224 cubic inches according to the standard wine gallon
preserved at Guildhall
264.8 according to the ancient Rumford quart
265.5 according to 3 standard bushels preserved in the
Exchequer
266.25 according to the ancient Rumford gallon of 1228
268.75 according to the winchester bushel, as declared
by statue 13,14 William III
271, less 2 spoonfuls, according to a standard gallon of Henry VII
272 according to 3 standard corn gallons measured in 1688
277.18 established for the measure of coal by the statue 12 Anne
278 according to the standard bushel of Henry VII, with a copper
rim
280 according to the standard quart of 1601
282 according to the standard gallon for beer and ale
So it seems our English cousins couldn't decide (or at least their
rulers couldn't) what it should be. Jefferson recommended that
the US split the difference and use 270 cubic inches as the
standard gallon.
scott s.
.
|