THE TIME OF DAY

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 33, 7 August 1931, Page 3

THE TIME OF DAY

ROUND OF. THE CLOCK f ADVOCATES OF CHANGE (From "The Post's" Representative.). * LONDON, 15th May. . la the House of Lords, Loid Newto* moved 'a resolution .urging the Port Office and the railway companies, for the purposes of their time-tables, to use a day consisting of one, set. of - twenty-four hours instead of two' set* of twelve hours. • -.' A Departmental * Committee •of th».7 Home Office advocated this^ method -ia 1919;' ' * ' Lord Newton explained that the 24----hour method had been adopted, as being far more practical, by the -Navy, and more or less completely by the Army, and the Air Force. It had the support of the Astronomer Eoyal, and was ia force with escellent results in many, other countries. It appeared that the railway companies'weTe waiting for th^ Post Office to set them' an example. Even if, as had been contended in * debate last year,' there was no pnblia excitement about the 'matter. > th« change would be useful, cost nothing, and require 'no legislation. The 24- ;_ hour system was really fool-proof, be=' cause the time could be calculated by; ' reckoning hours as shillings 'and pence/, —thus 5 p.m. could be thought of ■a» , Is 5d or 17 pence or 17 hours. Lord Stonehaven, as' chairman of the 1919 Committee, supported the proposal, although- Lord Banbury observed that the railway companies wanted, money for dividends rather than clocks, and Lord Moynihan thought that a popular habit was better than a scientific practice, especially if the habit, coires-. ponded with a proper division of th«^, day into work and rest. Lord Moriey described those Depart-" ments which had adopted the.24-hour, system as.the "more advanced." The Government promised to consider' tit matter _ carefully and sympathetically, and he asked Lord Newton to put down a. further question in six'weeks', time. On that understanding the, present resolution was withdrawn. ' OBJECTION" EXPLODED. In a letter to,',' The Times," Dr. G. - C. Simpson, Director'-of the Meteorological Office, remarks that when the ordinary citizen thinks over the ide* two practical questions at once arise ia his mind. ' "First,-if the proposal is adopted, will be.be expected to use the 24-hour nomenclature in ordinary intercourse and 'conversation?" This,-of course, is not the case,' for the use of the 24-hour system would be limited tb time-tables, notices, and formal statements; while \ in ordinary life we should continue to use the present system. This has been the experience in Continental countries' and in our own Army, Navy, and Air Force, for in- no case has the adoption of the 24-hour system, for official new led to its use in ordinary conversation,where it is neither necessary nor ( convenient. The two' systems exist' side by 'side,' and there is ncr more mental effort in converting from one to tha other than there is in converting eighteenpence into one and' sixpence. Secondly, must "we change the dials of our clocks and watches,- dividing' them into 24 hours instead of 12? Suck a dial would be as objectionable for a" 24-hour system of reckoning time as < for a v l2-hour system, and there' is no. suggestion whatever for altering' th» present .dials. Insome cases "the'num.*,,* bers' 13 to 24 might be' added to the numbers 1 to 12 already • inscribed on - the dial, but this is qujte unnecessary,-" and would be done-more as a matter o£-" interest than of nse." ■ - - . BED-TIME 21 O'CLOCK. ~ The Eev. Dr. T. A. Lacey, Canon <4y Worcester, writes: —"Lord Moynihan *sC impressive defence of our present'-clock-time as recognising 'a profouni*""biological truth, that one period of th<»." 24 hours should ,be given to activitjf." and the other to repose,' would be ntorajconvincing if'the hours1 were numbered^ from the beginning of, day and-of night' —a conventional beginning, of course, v because of tho tiresome vagaries of lati-.' ' tude. But, on the other hand, it is im-_ portant to impress biological truth > on.;the young, and'2l o'clock might be'a* more impressive announcement of bed"' time than 9 o'clock. When travelling on the Continent and studying Continental railway guides ono quickly be--comes accustomed to the 24-hour reckoning.' "So far as the citizen is'concerned," comments "The Times," "all that is needed is the ability to count up to twenty-four. Those who always suspect movements for reform may be assured that behind tho present proposals there lurks no plan for the fixation of Easter, or for the robbing of the Brit* ish people'of another eleven days." ORIGIN OF PRESENT CUSTOM. Perhaps "the best method of "discrediting the present system is to show1 its origin. The use of the numbers 60 and ' 24 for the measurement of time arose, among the Babylon'ans and needs no apology. They are far superior to th 6 decimal units—the Babylonians had a, decimal notation alongside the sexagesimal —in being exactly divisible by sev-: eral factors. A working day of twen- ■ ty-four hours, for example, can be divided into equal shifts of twelve, eight,* six, four, three, or two hours, which should find,place for the desires of. every one from the most hard-hearted of slave-drivers to the most visionary; of trade unionists. As tho system'wasemployed in Greece, where its opera- ' tion is known most fully, the day from sunrise to sunset, was divided into twelve hours and .the night from sunset to sunrise was also divided into" twelve hours. In consequence, day andV., night and the length of the' hour varied. ' with the season. A summer day hour, was long- and a summer night hour short; and the water-clocks had theiroutput ingeniously regulated- to meetthis variation in length. In .time the.absurdity of dividing up day, and night in this fashion was recognised and tha whole day and night was regarded as a, single unit of twenty-four equal hours. But the practice of using two sets of twelve hours continued, although its basis had been taken away; and it has, continued with all its anomalies to the present time. The custom is a relic of a long-gone past; it has no foundation! to-day and leads to-much confusion. ±. simple alternative is ready at hand s»4 should be adopted forthwith., ,