in the central line as altered by the impact, compound them with the perpendicular velocities which remain unaltered, and the resulting velocities and directions will be those with which the balls will proceed after the impact.

To take the most simple case, suppose the ball A, moving in the direction EC, and with the velocity EC, to strike the ball B, which is at rest. Join D and c, the centres of the balls, and decompose EC into FC in the line joining the centres, and EF perpendicular to it. Then A Fig. 2.

velocities CK and KD. The first is destroyed, and then partially retored by the impact; the second remains unaltered, except by the friction at the moment of impact, which we do not consider. If then we take DL equal to KD, and draw LM perpendicular to XY, and in length such a fraction of KC as e is of 1, the ball will move after impact with the velocities DL and LM, that is, with the velocity DM in the direction DM. If the system were perfectly inelastic, the ball would proceed along DL; if perfectly elastic, ML would be equal to CK, and DM and CD equally inclined to XY. If the size of the ball be taken into account, XY must be supposed to be a line parallel to the obstacle, and distant from it by the radius of the ball.

Direct impact and collision. Let the masses of the two balls or material particles be m and m', and let them move with uniform velocities v and v' in the same direction along a straight line, v being greater than v', so that m overtakes m'. Let u be the common velocity of the two balls when the compression at the moment of impact is a maximum; let P be the momentum spent in producing this compression, and ep the momentum acquired during the restitution of the form of the bodies, e being the coefficient of elasticity. Let v and v' be the velocities of the balls when collision ceases. Hence, we have the three following cases :

(1.) m v momentum of m at the beginning of collision.
P = momentum spent in producing compression.
mu = momentum of m, when compression is a max.-
..mv=mu + P.

V =

mv + m'v' m+m'

(v-v), and v' =

+ (vv).

Em m+m'

E m mv+m'v' m + m2 m + m' Oblique impact and collision. In oblique impact we assume that the mutual action of the balls during collision is along the line joining their centres at the instant when compression is a maximum, and along that line only; that is, we assume the balls to be perfectly smooth. Hence, if a smooth ball impinges obliquely on a smooth plane, the line of reaction of the plane will be perpendicular to its surface, and the momentum of the impinging ball will be affected along that line only.

In fig. 1, let the ball c impinge at D, and be carried away to M; let v and v' be the velocities before and after impact, and which are therefore proportioned to CD and DM.

The equations for the impact of two smooth balls are similarly formed, and may be easily understood from their analogy to those given above for direct impact. Thus, suppose two balls A and B to move in directions oblique to one another, and to strike each other. Decompose the velocity of each ball into two, one in the line joining the centres at the moment of impact, and the other perpendicular to it. The pair of velocities perpendicular to the central line will not be altered by the impact; and as far as the remaining velocities are concerned, the case is precisely the one already solved. Find the velocities

will only strike the ball B with the velocity FC. Suppose that by the preceding rules it is found that A, striking B at rest with the velocity FC, will be thrown back with the velocity CG, while B is struck forward with the velocity DK. Then B will receive this velocity, and this one only; as to a it has after the impact acquired the velocity ce, which it combines with the velocity GL, equal and parallel to EF; so that CL represents the velocity and the direction of the motion of a after the impact.

In every case of impact, when the balls approach one another with uniform velocities, the centre of gravity of the balls moves uniformly, and in a straight line. After the impact, though the directions and velocities of the balls may have changed, yet their centre of gravity still continues to describe the same line, and with the same velocity as before. This proposition is proved in all works on elementary mechanics.

The following conclusions will now be readily deduced by any one who understands the preceding results :

1. If two inelastic balls move in the same direction, they do not separate after the impact, but either move on with a common velocity, or are reduced to rest. If both move in the same direction, the velocity after impact is (aa + Bb)÷(A + B); but if they move in different directions, the motion after impact is in the direction of that ball of which the momentum (A or B) is the greatest, and the velocity is (Aα — Bb) ÷ (A + B) or (Bʊ · Aa)(A+B). When the momenta are equal, there is no motion after the impact. If b=0, or if one of the balls be at rest before impact, the velocity after impact is Aa (A+B). To deduce these results, make e= 0 in the formulæ, and give the velocities their proper signs.

2. If two perfectly elastic balls move in the same direction they separate after the impact, the velocity of the foremost being augmented from b to b + 2(a — b)î÷(A+B). But the velocity of the hindmost is either retarded, altogether destroyed, or made to change its direction, the algebraical formula for the velocity after impact being a — 2(a—b) B (A+B). This is nothing when B exceeds A, and when b is to a as BA is to 2B. And according as b is to a in a less or greater ratio than the preceding ratio, a's velocity is or is not altered in direction.

If two perfectly elastic balls move in opposite directions, that of A being called positive, the velocities of A and B after impact are determined in magnitude and direction by the formulæ

4. If two perfectly elastic balls be equal in magnitude, the velocity of each after the impact is that which the other had before the impact, both in magnitude and direction.

5. In all cases perfectly elastic balls recede from each other after impact with the same velocity with which they approached before impact; since if e=1, v-u-a-b. But in every other case the rate of recess after impact is the same proportion of the rate of approach before impact which e is of 1.

6. The vis viva, or product of the mass and square of the velocity, of a couple of perfectly elastic balls is the same before and after impact; in every other case it is less after impact than before.

For further mathematical developments and deductions from these general formulæ, we may refer especially to Professor Price's treatise on Infinitesimal Calculus,' vol. iii. c. 8 and 10; to Golding Bird's Natural Philosophy,' p. 134, et seq.; and to Professor Walker's treatise on Mechanics,' c. vii. p. 173.

COLLISIONS AT SEA. The accidental contact of vessels which traverse the ocean and the numerous channels and roadsteads of Europe, is a painful feature of commerce; because the extension of commerce must increase in fearful ratio the chances of calamities which, are known as collisions at sea.

These calamities present to us danger to human life in a new aspect. Its novelty consists not so much in the peculiarly frightful nature of accidents of this class, as in the causes which produce them. In the olden time, or even within the memory of the present generation, when ships ran foul of each other, it was seldom that loss of life attended these mishaps; and in the Channels the amount of damage would frequently extend, perhaps, to the loss of an anchor or two, the starting of a butt-end, or, perhaps, a crash not difficult to patch up until some port could be gained. The form of our shipping in those days was rather adapted to the carrying of burthens than for speed; and consequently, from the fuller lines of the bow of the ship the blow was distributed over a greater surface of timber, when ships were, moreover, built with greater strength.

Now, however, not only do ships, as a general rule, possess increase of speed, but their lines are so adjusted as to present the least possible resistance in their forward end, and their bows are absolutely wedgelike. Nor is this all; for instead of the fore-part of the stem-piece itself being 12 or 14 inches in thickness, many iron steamers of thousands of tons burthen present no more breadth of stem at the fore-part than belongs to a London wherry. Hence, in these times, circumstances seem to conspire towards the increase of danger in collisions; and from the combined influences of increased speed and the sharpness of stems, vessels at sea are really and daily in danger of being literally cut in two. In reading tales of chivalry, our horror may have been deep at the description of prowess and strength which would cleave a man to the brisket: shall we be unmoved now, when we hear of a fine ship being in like manner, and without any warning, cut through timbers and bulkhead, and windlass and deck, almost to the fore-mast itself? Yet such has occurred, and is always threatening. In the collision between the Mail and the Excelsior, off Birkenhead, in 1856, even worse than this happened, for the whole of the unfortunate passengers who were sleeping forward were in one instant crushed, and mangled, and destroyed in the general wreck, from the cutting-down blow of a sharp stem!

Thus collisions at sea must be viewed as evils of very great magnitude, requiring energetic and watchful legislation for their prevention; for, in addition to the changes in the mere forms of shipping referred to, another element of mischief is looming in the fast-diminishing distance, it is the increased size of shipping. Collisions, it is true, have only hitherto sent dozens of our fellow-creatures suddenly into eternity; but the period is at hand when these dozens may become hundreds, perhaps thousands, unless some more powerful influences are called into more active operation to prevent it. It is peculiarly the duty of a Cyclopædia to grapple impartially with any question in arts and sciences resulting from progress, and to examine the various subjects of its contents, in order to detect new features which menace, or to watch known aspects which indicate changes; and this subject will accordingly receive our proper attention.

The great difficulty of the question of collision is perhaps the prevailing erroneous idea that it is merely a nautical question; while, in reality, it affects directly the whole community, as passengers of ships are the members alike of coast-resident and inland families; and it is remarkable that ships carrying only their ordinary crews seem to have been less liable to the accidents under consideration than those carrying passengers.

An extraordinary fact has been elicited from the careful investigation of accidents which occurred in 1856. One would naturally have expected to find that collisions would especially occur during the time of fog or haze, or certainly in the hours of darkness; but the editor of the Nautical Magazine' has produced a statement or abstract in that valuable periodical, in which we find the following table of the collisions in 1856. (Nautical Mag.,' Nov., 1857):—

From the above it actually appears that the greater number of collisions occur in clear weather, and the least number in dark or thick weather. To whom, then, can we, in a spirit of impartiality, impute culpability? When mariners themselves are so seriously implicated, we can only turn imploringly (as in the cause of humanity) to the authorities themselves. It is easy to accuse even these of neglect, but it would really be difficult to convict them even of indifference. The collection of materials for the above table is of itself a proof that the government

of the country is alive to the importance of the question, that the naval heads of the Board of Trade are anxious to remedy this crying evil, this standing blot upon our seamanship and vigilance. The only inference an impartial public can draw is, that the onus and odium of the fault must rest, in a great measure, with the officers of ships themselves. It is well to consider if the comparative exemption of ships of war from collision arises from better discipline-better look-out. From the above it is evident that, 1st, More attention is called for on board merchant-ships generally; 2nd, The rules of the road by day may be defective; 3rd, The rules of the road by night may be defective also. Probably legislation can only partially present a remedy for the defect first mentioned. Surely it is beneath the dignity of a British sailor, either to run into or be run into by any craft that floats. There was a time when vigilance formed the very key-stone in the character of the English seaman; it is hoped the present generation will maintain this character. It may be that the changes from sailing to steaming have unsettled the habits of seamen, and that, in the confusion, accidents, for a time unavoidable, may occur; but is it not reasonable to expect that every merchant vessel should have at least one able seaman in each watch whose duty and responsibility should be to prevent collision? Surely precautions and responsibilities which attach to railway officials, might without hardship be enforced on, and attached to, officers of the mercantile marine, where such very serious interests of life and property are at stake. But legislation may be greatly assisted by some conventional, better-understood rules among ship-masters themselves; as for instance, larger steamers, being often difficult to steer readily, and drawing more water, should claim a proper consideration from smaller ones. A few examples made by the Board of Trade, in the salutary punishment of obstinate or unyielding masters of small craft, might, in river or estuary navigation, partially remove danger.

As regards the second assumption, namely, defective rules of the road by day, it is extremely difficult to know where to place the limit between stringent law and freedom of judgment. Nay, it may even be demonstrated, that compliance with any known law or rule as to the movement of the helm, irrespective of the judgment of the helmsman, would prove in many cases disastrous; and those who attempt by diagrams to illustrate any proposed rule, ought to remember that, in order to render their illustrations acceptable and useful, the vessels must not only be supposed to answer their helms with equal readiness, but their speed must be precisely similar. A discretionary power in commanders, by day, seems to be more valuable than all regulations, excepting such good old ones for sailing-vessels as starboard tack hold on, port tack give way, &c.; and for steamers, a good look-out, a good man at the helm, and passing each other on the port side, &c., ought to be enough.

In crowded rivers or channels, something might be done towards the greater safety of navigation. Something is, in fact, called for, on account of the various customs which prevail in certain districts; but a knowledge of them seems to be confined to the localities. And committees and others who have approached the question of collisions at sea, all seem to have neglected to give due prominence to the want of attention to that which is the root of evil,-namely, that when ships are approaching in opposite or oblique directions, no collision would be likely to take place if one commander knew what the other was about to do with his helm. Positive safety hinges on this.

So little however is this precious hint known or sought for in general, that, absolutely, a man-of-war steamer navigating the Thames, and meeting a river steamer, would use signs to her helmsman having opposite significations in each vessel; that is to say, for instance, the naval commander extending his hand to signify to his helmsman port, might be understood by the river steamer's rule to be about to starboard the helm. There is no rule of the road as enforced by law to prevent this: if any exists, the writer distinctly assures the public that it is not generally known, and even naval officers are left to their own judgment in this matter. And again, as if still further to complicate this serious question, a commander in each service will give his order by hand, according as he is fitted with a wheel or a tiller; for, as an example, motion of the hand generally indicates the direction in which motion is to be communicated to the part of the steering apparatus which is touched by the hand [STEERING APPARATUS], and the spokes of the wheel move in a direction contrary to that of the tiller. Without the aid, therefore, of some further legislation, can we hope to prevent collisions? It may, moreover, be remarked, that if two persons are meeting carelessly on a pavement, collision is only avoided by one of the two knowing in proper time what the other is about to do. The same remark applies to shipping: a ready means of knowing in time the intended motions of an opponent seems indispensable to safety. Some such rule, therefore, as the following is much wanted: When a commander (throughout the world, if possible), seeing another vessel approach, extends his right arm horizontally, let it signify to his own helmsman-starboard the helm; let the extension of his left arm signify to his own helmsman-port your helm. His opponent, seeing this, could act on the moment, and would know what to do accordingly. If in a steamer and about to stop her, let both his arms be held up while he gives the word. Accidents by day could, under such simple rules, scarcely occur.

In remarking upon the third assumption, that the rules of the road by night may be defective, we enter upon a wider field of inquiry; and although we purpose going somewhat fully into the question of lights at sea in its proper place in this work [LIGHTS AT SEA], we remark here how very plainly the tabular abstract given in a previous column shows, that if any system of lighting vessels under way did exist in 1856, that system required amendment. Some considerable improvement has indeed been made, after long and elaborate investigations, by the Board of Trade, through ship-masters, pilots, boatmen, &c., and evidence from all ports of Great Britain; yet we can show that great defects still mar the perfect working of the new regulations; and it is probable that the greater number of accidents by night from collision will still (as in 1856) abound on the parts of the coast which are best lighted, such as Dungeness, Beachy Head, the Start Point, &c.; for it is reasonable to suppose, that the more vessels congregate at those headlands, the more must the confusion of lights increase, as they are at present ordered to be used by sailing- and steam-vessels, each steamer having three and each sailing-vessel two lights. To distinguish a steamer from a sailing-vessel, the law wisely requires the steamer to carry a white light on the mast, besides the green and red lights, one on each side; while the sailing-vessel carries only the coloured lights, except when at anchor. Now, imagine a vessel suddenly entering a channel much frequented by steamers; every steam-vessel in sight will cause anxiety to every sailing or steam master, because the white light is seen all round, and the intensity of the various-coloured lights is so uncertain, especially in hazy weather, that a ship near at hand may exhibit coloured lights which are scarcely visible, while one more distant may show strong ones. Now, con fusion and anxiety would, it is evident, be caused to a mariner mainly by the number of white lights indicating steamers, each of which lights would require scrutiny to ascertain its connection or otherwise with coloured lights of a vessel under way; but what is now proposed would completely remedy this.

The following improvements, exceedingly simple in themselves, and very easy to be adopted, are submitted as a perfect and unobjectionable night system:

1. Let a white light always be considered a danger light.

2. Let steamers and sailing-vessels carry the screened coloured lights as at present; namely, green on the starboard side, red on the port side. But let these lights be placed abreast the foremast; at present they are often fixed upon the quarter, and consequently become shut in too soon.

3. Let all vessels, sailing or otherwise, when within soundings, carry also by night a white light.

4. Let steamers carry their white light at the mast, or high on the fore-stay; and sailing-vessels carry it at the bowsprit end, or somewhere low as convenient amidships.

5. Let all vessels at anchor carry a white light, showing all round, but not placed so high as to be mistaken for a steamer's: the absence of the coloured lights will always, as at present, show that it is only a vessel at anchor.

6. Let all white lights of vessels under way be so fixed and screened as only to be seen within a space of two points on either bow; and in case of a fast vessel overtaking a slower one, and in her wake, let all white lights of vessels under way be screened so as to be visible from abaft within one point of the line of keel astern. (This can easily be done.) These precautions being adopted, no confusion can embarrass a master mariner, because on entering a port, if a hundred vessels be there under sail or steam, he, so far as regards danger of being run into, need only notice the white or danger lights; these being "shut in," and there being a good average and trusty look out forward, confidence will not forsake a shipmaster or pilot, and the safety of his vessel will be in his own control; at present it is not, although the present system of shutting in a coloured light is good so far as it goes. In using, however, the danger light, some assistance can be given similar in effect to that produced by day, having for its object the power of immediately indicating and ascertaining what each master is about to do.

7. Let it therefore be a law that each commander or pilot has, between sunset and sunrise, always a hand-lantern ready lighted and standing on the paddle-box or near him, as most convenient; and being of one wick, having three faces (such are used on railways); the centre light being white, the left-hand one red, and the one on the right hand green. On seeing a danger-light near, if he intends to keep straight on, let him flash or swing his lantern with his white light towards his opponent's; if he is about to starboard his helm, let him exhibit his green light; if to port his helm, let him show his red light.

A few additional precautions or modifications may to some appear necessary; but the principle of a danger light is in our sea services necessary to the public safety; and while our object in giving to the public the actual state of the question is rather to suggest than to dictate, it is fully believed that, by attention to some such system as the above, collisions at sea may be rendered nearly impossible both by day and night, except from culpable negligence.

Another very important suggestion as to collisions at sea was published in the Nautical Magazine' in 1857. Mr. George Herbert, as already noticed under the word Buoys in this work, proposed to so

arrange or dispose of the traffic in the English and St. George's Channels as to give to maritime commerce what in its nature approximates closely to a tram-road system. The smile of incredulity and doubt is too readily raised in nautical men, nor can we be astonished if the minds of those who were trained in the old sea school are as yet unprepared for the great changes which every day's experience render more than probable. But we must be guarded. and not encourage rooted prejudices on subjects which require all our wisdom and vigilance. It is scarcely a reproach to the present age, that the scheme of penny postage, the screw steamer, the electric telegraph, &c., met with distrust. In this instance it is enough for us (and with that impartiality which ought to influence statements of the present condition of arts and science) to record the beginnings of a change which may take years to perfect; to make known suggestions, which, if it be found possible to be carried out, may greatly facilitate the transit of passengers and merchandise through the most perilous parts of a sea voyage, and prevent collisions, fifty-eight of which occurred in the English Channel alone in the year 1856, eight being attended with total loss.

Mr. Herbert's proposition seems to be founded on a remarkably simple assumption; namely, that we almost never hear of a vessel running foul of the Eddystone Lighthouse. He proposes, therefore, to moor light-vessels of a peculiar form (a general sketch of which has been given under the word BUOYS) in the English Channel, precisely in the generally received line of fairway, and to cause all ships and vessels bound down Channel to keep to the northward of this line, and all bound up Channel to navigate on the south side of this limit. To place light-vessels along this fairway line from Dungeness to just beyond the Scilly Islands, each light-vessel to be moored on the meridian of a degree of longitude. By this means the light-ships would in the latitude of the Channel be only about 38 miles apart, and each would be marked with a conspicuous number indicating its longitude. Vessels in the fairway track could never in fair weather be far out of sight of some one of those lights after sunset.

That some such plan as the above would be a boon to shipping can scarcely admit of a reasonable doubt; but when we remark, further, that Mr. Herbert's plan is extended to highly interesting details,-such as having a store of provisions and water at the westernmost light-ship, for the relief of those so frequently detained by adverse winds for several weeks, and to relieve whom, at present, the Admiralty are obliged occasionally to send ships of war; to have effective fog-signals at each light-vessel; to have a submarine telegraph to the westernmost light, in order that arrivals may be announced, these, and various other ingenious and valuable suggestions, seem to be worthy of an impartial investigation by the Board of Trade. In the cause of humanity, as having reference only to the question of collision in the English and St. George's Channels, surely the endeavour to prevent accidents to life and property on so great a scale should not be impeded by merely speculative and perhaps visionary obstacles, and possibly by the unfounded disparagements which novelties, as such, too often evoke.

The responsibility of introducing some such scheme as the above would weigh lightly when placed in the balance with the responsibilities which far more heavily attach to supineness and indifference.

COLOCYNTH, or as it is called on the Continent, coloquintida, or bitter-apple, an annual plant. [CUCUMIS, in NAT. HIST. DIV.] Referred in the London Pharmacopoeia,' to the genus Citrullus (Schrad.), the fruit of which is about the size of, but rather lighter colour than, an orange; the rind smooth; when the rind has been removed, a white spongy pulp or pith is found within, which constitutes the officinal part, or the colocynth, the seeds being rejected. The rind is generally removed before reaching Europe, except the larger variety from Mogadore, used for exhibiting in show-bottles in druggists' windows. One hundred parts of decorticated apples consist of twenty-eight parts of pure pith, and seventy-two parts of seeds.

The active principle is a peculiar bitter principle (Colocynthin), which is of a resinoid nature, more soluble in alcohol than water; its solubility in water is much increased by union with extractive, combined with which it exists in the pulp, so that nearly all the virtues are yielded to a watery extract, which is generally employed for its administration. The compound extract, in the formation of which proof spirit is used, and to which are added other purgative substances and aromatics, is, however, preferable, and it is thereby rendered milder yet more certain in its action.

It is a purgative in very constant use, either alone, or more commonly united with mercurial purgatives: it is employed for the removal of constipation and visceral obstructions; at the commencement of fevers and other inflammatory complaints it is of decided utility. As an overdose has all the poisonous effect of a vegetable acrid, it must be used with caution.

The derivation of the word is uncertain. It is supposed to have been given originally to the leader of a body of men appointed to found a colony; or to have come from the word coronarius, indicating the ceremony of investing an officer with the command of a corps; or, finally, from the word columna, denoting the strength or support of an army. The title of colonel-general was, for the first time, conferred by Francis I., about the year 1545, on officers commanding considerable divisions of French troops, though, according to Brantome, it had been given to the chief of an Albanian corps in the service of France at an earlier period. When the troops of that country were formed into regiments (the infantry about 1565, and the cavalry seventy years afterwards), the chiefs of those corps were designated Mestres de Camp; and it was not till 1661, when Louis XIV. suppressed the office of colonel-general of infantry, that the commanders of regiments had the title of colonel.

In England, the constitution of the army was formed chiefly on the model of the French military force; and the terms regiment and colonel-general were introduced into this country during the reign of Elizabeth. It must, moreover, be observed, that in the regulations made by the citizens of London for forming the militia in 1585, it is proposed to appoint colonels having authority over ten captains; and that both colonels and lieutenant-colonels are distinctly mentioned in the account of the army which was raised in order to oppose the threatened invasion of the country in 1588. Before the time of Elizabeth, it appears that the commanders of bodies of troops equivalent to regiments had only the general title of captain.

The duties of colonels formerly are described in Ward's 'Animadversions of Warre,' which was published in 1639. The colonelcy of a regiment is now an honorary title carrying a certain emolument with it. See Hart's Army List.' The colonels of regiments have little or nothing to do with the actual command of the regiment, but are generally general officers, who receive the colonelcy of a regiment either by seniority or for distinguished service. The emolument above referred to was derived formerly from the colonels providing the clothing of a regiment, and being allowed the difference between the price at which the contractor furnished the clothing and the sum allowed by government. This has now been changed to a fixed emolument, and the clothes are provided by government. Colonels take precedence of one another according to the dates of their commissions, and not according to the seniority of their regiments.

The lieutenant-colonel is in rank immediately under the full colonel. He has the whole command of the regiment, and is responsible for the drill and discipline.

The annual pay of a colonel is, in the Life Guards, 18007.; in the Grenadier Guards, 1200l.; in the Coldstream and Scots Fusilier Guards, 10007.; in the 1st Dragoon Guards, 10007.; in the cavalry regiments generally, 9001.; and in the regular infantry, 500l. The daily pay of a lieutenant-colonel is, in the Life Guards, 1l. 98. 2d.; in the Foot Guards, 11. 68. 9d. ; and in the infantry, 17s. The price of a lieutenantcolonel's commission is, in the Foot Guards, 9000l.; in the Life and Horse Guards, 72501.; in the Dragoons, 6175l.; and in the infantry of the line, 4500. For further particulars of rates of pay, &c., see 'Hart's Army List,' pay tables.

COLONNADE, a general term for any range of columns supporting an architrave. The term peristyle is often applied in the same sense, yet somewhat inaccurately, since it denotes a range of columns continued quite round a building or court, as in a peripteral temple, the Town Hall at Birmingham, or the Bourse at Paris. The covered way at the Quadrant, Regent Street, was a good example of a colonnade; the most familiar existing examples are the colonnade at the Italian Opera House in the Haymarket, and the columned front of the British Museum.

COLONY (in Latin colonia, a word derived from the verb colo, colere, to till or cultivate the ground) originally signified a number of people transferred from one country or place to another, where lands were allotted to them. The people themselves were called Coloni, a word corresponding to our term colonists. The meaning of the word was extended to signify the country or place where colonists settled, and is now often applied to any settlement or land possessed by a Sovereign state upon foreign soil. Thus Ceylon and the Mauritius are called British colonies, though they are not colonised by Englishmen, the former being inhabited by natives, and the second by French or descendants of French colonists. The proper notion of the word "colony" (as determined by the general use of the term) seems to be a tract of land, either wholly or partly colonised, that is to say, possessed and cultivated by natives, or the descendants of natives, of another country, and standing in some sort of political connection with and subordination to that country, which is then called the mother country.

The formation of colonies is among the oldest occurrences recorded in history or handed down by tradition. Maritime states, such as those of Phoenicia and of Greece, possessing only a scanty territory, would naturally have recourse to emigration as their population increased. In both these countries the sea afforded a facility for transferring a part of their superabundant citizens, with their families and moveables, and their arms, to some foreign coast, either uninhabited or

thinly peopled by less-civilised natives, who, by good will or by force, gave up to them a portion of their land. The emigration might be voluntary or forced; it was no doubt in many cases the result of civil contentions or foreign conquest, by which the losing party were either driven away, or preferred seeking a new country to remaining at home. The report of some remote fertile coast abounding in valuable productions would decide others. Lastly, the state itself having discovered, by means of its merchants and mariners, some country to which they could trade with advantage, might determine upon sending out a party of settlers, and might establish a factory there for the purpose of sale or exchange. In fact, commercial enterprise seems to have led both to maritime discovery and to colonisation as much as any one single cause. Such seem to have been the causes of the numerous Phoenician colonies which, at a very early date, were planted along the coasts of the Mediterranean. Tyre itself was a colony of Sidon, according to the Old Testament, which calls it the "daughter of Sidon." Leptis Magna, near the great Syrtis, was also a colony of Sidon, according to Sallust (Jugurth." c. 78). Hippo, Hadrumetum, Utica, and Tunis, were Phoenician colonies, and all of greater antiquity than Carthage. The Phoenician colonies extended along the north coast of Africa as far as the Pillars of Hercules (the Straits), and along the opposite coast of Spain, as well as on the Balearic islands, and Sardinia and Sicily. Those on the Spanish coast seem to have been at first small settlements or factories for the purpose of trade between the metropolis or mother country and the natives. Several of them, however, such as Gades, by degrees took the trade into their own hands, and became independent of the mother country. The foundation of Carthage was an instance of another kind. It resulted, according to tradition, from an emigration occasioned by the tyranny of a king of Tyre. There is another confused tradition of a Phoenician or Canaanite emigration to Mauritania, occasioned by the conquest of Palestine by Joshua, and mentioned by Procopius and Suidas, as well as by some Jewish commentators. [BERBERS, GEOG. DIV.] The Phoenicians very early settled in the fertile island of Cyprus, which lay opposite their own coast. Of their settlements in the islands of the Ægean Sea we have only traditions referring to times previous to the war of Troy, and mentioned by Herodotus, and after him by Thucydides, who says that the Phoenicians and the Carians inhabited most of the islands, and carried on piracy, until Minos, king of Crete, drove them away, and planted new colonies. Herodotus says they had once a settlement in the island of Thasus, where they worked the gold mines. They also had a settlement on the island of Cythera (Cerigo), which lay conveniently for their trade with the Peloponnesus. Thucydides (vi. 2, &c.) also mentions that the Phoenicians formed establishments on the promontories and small islands on the coast of Sicily, from which they traded with the native Siculi; but that when the Greeks came to settle in great numbers in that island, the Phoenicians abandoned several of their posts, and concentrated themselves at Motya, Soloeis, and Panormus, now Palermo (which last probably had then another name), near the district occupied by the Elymi or Phrygian colonists (who had emigrated from Asia after the fall of Troy, and had built Entella and Egesta), trusting to the friendship of the latter, and also to their proximity by sea to their countrymen of Carthage. These three Phoenician settlements, however, merged afterwards into Carthaginian dependencies. The Phœnicians appear also to have occupied Melita or Malta, and the Lipari islands, one of which retained the name of Phoenicusa. Of the Phoenician settlements in the south part of Sardinia we have the report of Diodorus (v.) and a fragment of Cicero pro Scauro, published by Mai. The Phoenicians and Libyans are said to have been the earliest settlers in Sardinia, and to have founded Caralis (Cagliari) and Sulci. A Phoenician inscription was found in a vineyard at Cape Pula, belonging to the monks of the order of Mercy, and was explained by De Rossi, Effemeridi Letterarie di Roma,' 1774. But the undoubted field of Phoenician colonisation was the north coast of Africa. There the Phoenician settlements seem to have been independent, both of the mother country and of each other. We have the instance of Utica and Tunes, which continued separate communities even after Carthage had attained its great power; Carthage only exercising the hegemony or supremacy. This seems to have been the case among the original Phoenician towns; Sidon, Tyre, Aradus, &c., each a distinct commonwealth, forming a sort of federation, at the head of which was the principal city, at first Sidon, and afterwards Tyre. A feeling of mutual regard seems to have prevailed to the last between the various Phonician towns and colonies, including Carthage, as members of one common family.

The colonies established afterwards by the Carthaginians in the interior as well as on the coast of Africa, Sicily, and Spain, were upon a different plan from those of the Phoenicians: they were made through conquest and for the purpose of keeping the country in subjection, like those of the ROMANS [CARTHAGE, GEOG. DIV.], with the remarkable exception of the emigration colonies taken by Hanno to the west coast of Africa.

The earlier Greek colonies appear to have owed their origin to the same causes, and to have been founded upon the same plan as those of the Phoenicians. Thucydides (i.) says, that "after the Trojan war, and the subsequent conquest of Peloponnesus by the Dorians, Greece being restored to tranquillity, began to send out colonies. Athenians, whose country was overflowing with people from other

The