Hear All Sides

METRIC MARTYRS

THERE is still a lot of confusion and misinformation in the public domain with regard to the prosecution of the Metric Martyrs.

Steven Thoburn was prosecuted for weighing a pound of bananas on a set of scales which did not bear an official stamp. The scales were perfectly accurate, but the stamp had been removed on a previous visit by a trading standards officer because it is now deemed a criminal offence to use imperial measures for trade. He was subsequently found guilty, given a six month conditional discharge and threatened with an order for £55,000 costs if he appealed.

People have been confused because the situation is so absurd and they are looking for a complicated answer.

Steven had metric scales. Steven has always dual-priced in metric and imperial, but it is also deemed to be a criminal offence to give the imperial price prominence.

There are hundreds of thousands of shopkeepers breaking these regulations on a daily basis, but only five across the country have found themselves before the courts.

If, as a consumer, you fail to make a purchase in anything but metric, even reading a sign which does not have metric prominence, then that shopkeeper is deemed to be committing a criminal offence.

Selective prosecution of individuals least able to defend themselves against regulations that have been sneaked by stealth past the British public, has made criminals out of honest, hard-working shopkeepers and market traders.

To stand up to this injustice against the massive might of local and central government's unlimited resources (our money) has taken immense courage.

The way the compulsory metrication programme has been handled by ministers and officials at all levels has been absolutely shambolic and has incensed the ordinary British public to such a degree that they are continuing to fund the appeal to ensure that justice will finally be seen to be done. - Neil Herron, Metric Martyrs Defence Fund, Sunderland, on behalf of Steven Thoburn, Colin Hunt, Peter Collins, John Dove, Julian Harman.

WHEN Britain switched its coinage from d to p it went metric. Hands up all those who want to go back to the farthing, halfpenny, penny, threepenny bit, sixpence, shilling, florin, halfcrown and the idiotic guinea?

It is our children who represent the future, and not we old people who represent the past and the passing.

British measurement systems are good for a laugh anyhow. Did you know that at one time two fardels equalled one nooke and that King Henry I decreed that One Foot equalled 36 barleycorns, and that British Railways ended up with the distance between rails at 4 feet 8 and one quarter inches because that was the distance between the wheels of a Roman chariot?

Steven Thoburn is not the innocent man he is portrayed to be. The law on weights and measures protects everybody, not just we oldies. Mr Thoburn can sell by imperial measure and can do so for some years yet, but he must offer the alternative.

He might find it a lot cheaper to buy a set of metric scales than fight a High Court action. As a taxpayer I would have no sympathy if he loses his action. - Willis Collinson, Durham City.

MR Collinson's statement (Echo, Dec 28) that computers can only calculate in metric units is ridiculous. One of the reasons why compulsory metrication is no unnecessary is precisely because in this age of computers all such conversions are automatic.

Furthermore, computer mathematics are based on binary arithmetic which is perfectly compatible with the imperial system because both are geared to a constant process of halving and doubling, but incompatible with metric because you cannot halve and double with a system limited to five and ten. The universal measurement of time and music and the measurement of the Earth by latitude and longitude - are all based on our customary system.

He is equally wrong about counting on fingers. We have four fingers, each with three joints, so primitive peoples counted in twelves not tens.

Should honest traders be convicted as criminals for serving their customers in measures that they understand? That is the question he cannot answer. - Vivan Linacre, British Weights and Measures Association, Edinburgh.

CHESTERFIELD HOUSE

THE decision to allow the demolition of Chesterfield House shows that Darlington Borough Council has little regard for conserving our town's heritage and begs the question: what does the Conservation Area designation stand for?

It is shameful the council has sanctioned demolition of Chesterfield so that the developer, Darlington Building Society, can maximise profits.

Councillors have condemned a structurally sound building without fully exploring alternatives for retention and conversion. It appears that even if facts are not clear or fully available, planning approval will be granted rather than an application deferred to ensure that the decision is made on fully informed facts.

It was unacceptable that English Heritage was only alerted to this scheme through objectors' letters. The council has been in discussion with Darlington Homes for 12 months but waited until six weeks ago to consult these experts.

The door is now wide open for developers to demolish buildings which are not as profitable to convert as bulldozing a site to make way for higher density developments.

Councillor Williams and his fellow Labour Councillors, who approved demolition, and Darlington Building Society, should be ashamed. They have destroyed another fine, structurally sound, historic building to make way for an unsympathetic apology of modern architecture, which has no place in the Stanhope Road Conservation Area. - Jenny Leeming, Darlington.