The adoption of the universal day or any system of time-reckoning based upon infrequent—­such as the great quadrant—­meridians, to be used by transportation lines collaterally with local time, is, therefore, practically impossible.

Shall it, then, be concluded that there is no hope of securing uniformity in time-reckoning for practical purposes?  Or does the proposition for the general division of the earth’s surface into specified sections, governed by standards based upon meridians fifteen degrees or one hour apart, supply the remedy?  Objections have been urged against this proposition on account of difficulties encountered, or supposed to be encountered, in the vicinity of the boundary lines between the sections.  It is argued that the contact of two sections with standards of time differing by one hour will cause numerous and insuperable difficulties.  In railway business, in which time is more largely referred to than in any other, the experience of the past year has proved this fear to be groundless.  It is true that the approximate local time of a number of cities near the boundary lines between the eastern and central sections in the United States is still retained.  A curious chapter of incidents could be related which led to this retention, not affecting, however, the merits of the case; but the fact serves to show that changes much greater than thirty minutes from local time would not be acceptable.

Adjacent to and on either side of all national boundary lines the inhabitants become accustomed to the standards of weights, measures, and money of both countries, and constantly refer to and use them without material inconvenience.  In the readjustment of a boundary upon new lines of demarcation it must be expected that some temporary difficulties in business transactions will be encountered, but all history shows that such difficulties soon adjust themselves.  Legal enactments will finally determine the precise boundaries of the several sections.  If different laws respecting many other affairs of life may exist on either side of a State or national boundary line, with positive advantage or without material inconvenience, why should laws respecting time-reckoning be an exception?  Coins and measures are distinguished by their names.  So, also, may standards of time be distinguished.

The adoption of standard time for all purposes of daily life, based upon meridians fifteen degrees apart, would practically abolish the use of exact local time, except upon those meridians.  Numerous circumstances might be related demonstrating how very inaccurate and undetermined was the local time used in many cities in this country before the recent change.

Except for certain philosophical purposes, does the inherent advantage claimed in the use of even approximately accurate local time really exist?  Would the proposed change affect any custom of undoubted value to the community?  These questions have been answered in the negative by the experience of Great Britain since January 13, 1848, of Sweden since January 1, 1879, and of the United States and Canada since November 18, 1883.