Page:EB1911 - Volume 27.djvu/1041

Rh Scotland.—In Scottish law venue is not used as a technical term, but there are statutory provisions for changing the place of trial in both civil and criminal cases.

United States.—In the United States venue may generally be changed by the courts; but in some states it is provided by their constitutions that provision for change of venue is to be made by the legislature. In other states the passing of local or special laws for change of venue is forbidden.

 VENUS, an old Roman and Latin goddess, apparently representing beauty and growth in nature, and especially in gardens, where the Roman practical sense would most naturally see these. She had two temples in Rome, one in the grove of Libitina, with whom she was wrongly identified, and the other near the Circus Maximus, both of which had as their dedication day the 19th of August, the festival of the Visalia rustica, a fact which also points in the direction of skilled cultivation as the human work of which she was protectress. But this old Latin deity was in historical times entirely absorbed by the Greek Aphrodite, and assumed the characteristics of a cult of human love, which in her original form she had never possessed. (See .)

 VENUS, in astronomy, the second of the major planets in the order of distance from the sun, and moving next within the orbit of the earth. Its symbol is. At inferior conjunction it approaches nearer to the earth than any other major planet, but in that position it is practically invisible. Its apparent motion may be described as an oscillation from one side of the sun to the other, the complete period of which is 1.6 years, and the greatest elongation about 45° on each side of the sun. When east of the latter it appears as the “evening star” in the west after sunset, while near western elongation it is seen as the “morning star” before sunrise. In these aspects it was known to the ancients as , Hesperus, and  or  , Phosphorus. The eccentricity of its orbit is smaller than that of any other planet except Neptune.

Notwithstanding the near approach of Venus to the earth, its situation relative to the sun is unfavourable to the study of its physical constitution. Near inferior conjunction only a narrow crescent of light is visible; and when, as the planet moves away, this crescent becomes broader, the distance of the planet constantly increases. When it appears as a half-moon it is at a distance of more than two-thirds that of the sun, and nearly double the distance of Mars in opposition. The difficulty of reaching any conclusion on the subject of its constitution is heightened by the seeming absence of any well-marked features on the visible part of its brilliant surface. In the telescope it presents much the appearance of burnished silver, without spot or blemish. It is true that observers have from time to time thought they could detect slight variations of shade indicating an axial rotation. As far back as 1667 G. D. Cassini thought he saw a bright spot near the southern horn, observations of which gave a period of about 23 hours. In 1726 Francesco Bianchini (1662–1729), a papal chamberlain, made similar observations from which he inferred a period of more than 24 days. It was shown, however, that the observations of Bianchini could be reconciled with those of Cassini by supposing that, as he observed the planet night after night, it had made one rotation and a little more. J. H. Schroeter also found a revolution of less than 24 hours. But Sir W. Herschel, as in the case of Mercury, was never able to detect any changes from which a period of rotation could be determined. During the years 1888–1890, G. Schiaparelli made an exhaustive study of the whole subject, the results of which were summed up in five brief notes, read to the Lombardian Academy of Sciences during the year 1890. His general conclusion was that Venus always presents the same face to the sun, as the moon does to the earth. The same result has been reached by the observations at the Lowell Observatory. The inference that the axial rotation is at least much slower than that of the earth is strengthened by the measures of different diameters of the planet made while it was in transit across the disk of the sun in 1874 and 1882. These show no measurable ellipticity of the disk, but they are not sufficiently accurate to lead to any more precise conclusion than that just stated. Still, the difficulty and uncertainty attending all observations hitherto made upon the disk are such that no conclusion respecting the time of rotation can be regarded as established. Against the view of Schiaparelli is to be set the great improbability that a body so distant from the sun as Venus could be permanently so acted upon as to keep its axial rotation in precise coincidence with its orbital motion. Only one way seems to be open for settling the question; this is by spectroscopic observations of the displacement of the spectral lines at the two limbs of the planet. Attempts by this method have been made by A. A. Belopolski at Pulkova, and by the astronomers of the Lowell Observatory. It is, however, found that the amount of displacement is so small that it has evaded certain detection up to the present time. Belopolski’s measures were decidedly in favour of an axial rotation, while the Lowell results were not.

Other observations than those we have cited show that Venus is surrounded by an atmosphere so filled with clouds that it is doubtful whether any view of the solid body of the planet can ever be obtained. The first evidence in favour of an atmosphere was found in the fact that, when near inferior conjunction, the visible outline of the thin crescent extended through more than 180°. Most remarkable was an observation by Chester Smith Lyman at New Haven during the conjunction of 1866, when the planet was just without the sun. A thin line of light was supposed to be seen all round the limb of the planet most distant from the sun. But as no such appearance was seen during the approach of the planet to the sun at the transits of 1874 and 1882, when the conditions were much more favourable, it seems likely that such observations are the result of an optical illusion. During the latter of the two transits the phenomena of this class observed were of an unexpected character. Not a trace of the planet could be seen until it began to impinge upon the solar disk. When about half of its diameter had entered upon the sun the outline outside the disk of the sun began to be marked by broken portions of an arc of light. This did not begin at the point A (fig. 1) farthest from the sun, as it should have done if due wholly to refraction, but immediately at the sun itself, as shown in the cut at the point B. Portions of this arc were formed one by one at various other points of the dotted outline, and when the planet was about three-fourths upon the sun the arc was completed. But there was no strengthening of the line at the middle point, as there should have been if due to refraction. Yet refraction must have played some part in the phenomenon, because otherwise no illumination could have been visible under the circumstances. The most satisfactory explanation seems to be that of H. N. Russell, whose conclusion is that the atmosphere is so permeated with fine particles of vapour up to its outer limit as to be only translucent without being fully transparent. Thus what is seen is the irregular reflection of the light at an extremely small angle from the particles of vapour. EB1911 - Venus Fig 1.png The question whether Venus has a satellite has always interested astronomers. During the 17th and 18th centuries Cassini at Paris and James Short (1710–1768) in England, as well as other observers during the same period, saw an object which had the appearance of a satellite. But as no such object has been seen by the most careful search with the best instruments of recent times, the supposed object must, be regarded as what is known to the practical astronomer as a “ghost” produced by refraction from the lenses of the eye piece, or perhaps of the object-glass, of the telescope.