Why does "cal 9 1752" produce incorrect results?

[Kaleb Keithley]

In article fuchs at it.uka.de (Harald Fuchs) writes:
>Nathan.Torkington at comp.vuw.ac.nz (Nathan Torkington) writes:
>>In article khenry at umaxc.weeg.uiowa.edu (Ken Henry) writes:
>>>Does anybody know why "cal 9 1752" produce incorrect
>
>>I believe there was a date change sometime, where the civilised world lost
>>a fortnight to allow the 'old calendar' to become the 'new calendar' which
>>would be in sync with the seasons ...
>
>You seem to think of the Julian -> Gregorian calendar shift, but that
>was 1582 AD.

In Europe, yes; but here in the colonies (where we're so progressive :-))
it took us 170 years to figure out that we should change the calendar. 
Thank God we did it before the revolution, 'cause if we waited 'till
after, Congress probably would've put it on their schedule behind the
Federal budget, and we'd still be two weeks behind Europe today.

In the waning days of the Julian calendar usage in North America, if
ships could make the Atlantic crossing in less than two weeks, you could
mail a letter from London and have it arrive in New York before the day 
it was sent.

Daniel Boorstin, in his book "Discoverers" mentions that American
landlords wanted the full months rent for that September, while all the
tenents wanted to pay only two weeks rent.  Can't imagine why?

-- 
Kaleb Keithley                      Jet Propulsion Labs
kaleb at thyme.jpl.nasa.gov

Good girls get to go to heaven, but bad girls get to go everywhere!