STABILISING THE CALENDAR.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVII, Issue 20758, 29 December 1930, Page 8

STABILISING THE CALENDAR.

The announcement that preparations are being made for the summoning of an international conference next year, under the auspices of the League of Nations, to examine proposals for a reform of the calendar should direct popular attention to a subject that has generally been regarded as of little more than academic interest, since the calendar seems, to be almost immutably established in its present form. The reform propagandists start from the point that the year is not astronomically correct, so that the calendar requires periodical adjustment, and that the division of the year into months of various lengths is entirely arbitrary. They contend that the inconveniences of adjustment to a new method of recording the passage of the year would be fully, compensated by the advantages of greater uniformity in the length of months and in the association of day-names with dates. The most radical revision would divide the year into 13 months of 28 days, leaving an odd day in every year and two odd days in leap year to be specially designated. Under this scheme, each week day name would be associated with four dates in every month, and days and dates would coincide in every year. There would, in fact, be a perpetual calendar instead of one that is reproduced only once in every 28 years. The alternative proposal is designed to preserve the present divisions into 12 months and four quarters, and secures uniformity of the latter by redistribution of the year, so that in each quarter there would be two months of 30 days "and one of 31 days. Hence there are 13 weeks in each quarter, but the months do not contain a complete number of weeks. This plan would also give uniformity of days and dates from year to, year. Incidental to both schemes is the fixation of Easter and automatically of all festivals and holidays. The advantages of simplifying the calendar may be readily conceded. There are, however, artificial elements which will arouse opposition. The strongest objections have been made against the proposal that the 365 th day in each year and the extra day in leap vear should not .be counted in the calendar at all, but regarded as "blank days outside the week, or as international holidays. It is suggested that the former should be inserted between the last (28th) day of December, a Saturday, and the first day of January, a Sunday, so that in practice there would either be two days of rest and worship, according to one view, or the intervention of a secular holiday between the end of the week and the Sabbath. The same difficulty would arise from the intercalation of the odd day in leap year, which would also have to be treated as a nullity. On religious grounds alone, there are therefore grave defects in tho reform schemes. In addition, the modern world cannot entirely cease its labours at any time, and the commercial complications arising from the exclusion of a day from the calendar might not be easily overcome.