26 
Beform in the Representation, 
as the root, in the other the substantive 
feus'*], thoutjh perhaps without any sub¬ 
stantial reason for the distinction. 
Admirer. 
To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine. 
SIR, 
WISH to say, speaking of the tra¬ 
gedies of Alfieri, wiiere the noblest 
passions, affections, and sentiments, are 
expressed, his Filippo, Merope, \''iroinia, 
Bruto Primo & Secundo, Timoleon, 
Againernnone, Saul, Mirra, Antigone, 
Oreste : these are proofs that the trans- 
poi tingly generous, the awfully pathetic, 
-were as much his province as the terrible 
and the sublime. Many of these subjects 
would have been revolting and horrible 
in other hands, particularly the first, 
fourth, fifth, and the ninth, 
I wish to complete my reference to 
Price on the Picturesque, thus I. p. 
S37, note : duro & t(iglie7ite; couleurs 
iranchantes, &c. 
REFORM in the representation’. 
Cama expensa, amplectere partem 
ipuam mens et ratio, •veri studiosa, prohabit. 
POLIGNAC. 
On tliis great subject I would offer 
some remarks occasioned by the tract 
published by Mr. Ranbt of Bur v, in his 
“ Entjuiry into the s,upposed Increuae of 
the It.yl'ience of ih^ Croton, the Present 
State of that Inf lienee, and theEspediency 
of a Pariiamtntary Pefornid^^ 
Mr. Ranby seems to suppose that 
foe advocates for a reform in the repre¬ 
sentation ground themselves . on the in¬ 
creased influence of the crown in the 
house of commons. 
And he endeavours to shew that in 
the last twenty years, reckoning from 
1790 to 1810, this influence has not in¬ 
creased, but diminished. This he at¬ 
tempts by Slating several divisions within 
that period : in winch the Opposition has 
approached more nearly to the numbers 
of the minister on a division in the latter 
than in tiie earlier part ofir. 
Now it does not appear that this is a 
necessary standard of the existence and 
proportion of the influence stated, 
Mr. Ranby quotes four instances in 
the former part of this period, in the 
first part of which the minority was less 
th.nn one-fiftl), indeed fell very near to 
one-sixth of tiie majority: in the second 
it was less than one-third ; in the third 
^ Lund, 18ila 
[Aug. I, 
it w'as little more than one-seventh ; and 
in the fourth, which comes down to 1805, 
it was almost exactly one-third ; in the 
'fifth, March Cch of that year, it was not 
much more than one-third ; and in the 
two first of the series, the whole number 
■^dded together was only 340 and 376; 
and in tiie tvvo last (which were since 
the Union) 419 and 894; so that ministry, 
it strikingly appears, if they had wanted 
greater miinbers could have had tliem. 
Some of them, considering the questions 
and the times, may argue at one time, 
despair at another division of party and 
sentiments in the Opposition, but neither 
can give a standard what the full extent 
of the influence of the minister (positively 
or relatively) was at those tunes. The 
P.ed Book might give a somewhat nearer 
idea. In 1807, in so remarkably full 
a house as 505, the minister counted 
350, which is much more than two to 
one. 
And further, it is a great mistake, and 
is contrary to repeated assertions and 
statements recently made by the friends 
rejorm, to suppose that the influence 
ot the crown is the only influence, or per¬ 
haps even the principal influence (whe¬ 
ther it he increased or not) to be dreaded 
at this moment. 
There is the borough oligarchy; and 
of the close boroughs the Crow n has a 
direct interest but in a small part: the 
greater part are in the hands neither of 
the crown nor even of the aristocracy; but 
of any nabob, any contractor, any monied 
bidder, that may chuse either to purchase 
the nomination to a seat, or, where 
the electors are too numerous for iliar, 
though too few for independence, may, 
by corruption, from time to time acquire 
their votes. 
This, however, mav sometimes be for 
the mimster and sometimes against him 
o 
(though least'likely to be for him in pro¬ 
portion as he is a good minister) : some¬ 
times for the crown or tiie aristocra'cy, 
(for the crown is not always identified 
with the minister either in interest or 
sentiment), and sometimes against either. 
It is likely to be, almost at all times, 
wheresoever it is active, perniciously ac¬ 
tive, for or against whomsoever it may 
act : it is not likely that, springing from 
so narrow* and so corrupt a source, it 
should ever act for the country, the con¬ 
stitution, tiie community, or the gene¬ 
ral interests of mankind ; although some 
members thus chosen may. 
Another idea of Mr. Ranby’s I must 
very much dispute; that it is a proper and 
constitutiutiM 
