tical apoftacy of the man who, when out of place, would prefs the country to call for, and the legislature to countenance, plans of reform which he, when in place, pronounces to be pregnant with ruin to the conflitution. On this head, the author writes with great and juft feverity: but there are some points in which he does not appear to have a very correct idea either of the reform which he would have adopted in England, or of the principle of reprefentation which has received the royal fanction in Corfica. In both cafes it would feem as if a full and free reprefentation were the object: but a wide difference appears to occur between the means to be used in the attainment of the end. Some reformers call for an equal representation, and fome for the right of univerfal fuffrage: these terms are not fynonymous; for, though every man in England should have a vote for a reprefentative in parliament, yet every man could not be faid to be equally reprefented, as long as (for inftance,) the little county of Rutland fhould return as many members as Yorkshire. Equality of reprefentation has been established in Corfica, in as much as that the country is divided into pieves, or districts, as nearly as poffible of equal extent and population, and each pieve fends two members to parliament; towns, alfo, containing 3000 inhabitants, have the fame privilege: but it is by no means true that the principle of universal fuffrage has been admitted in Corfica. In Sir Gilbert Elliot's difpatch of the 21st of June, to Mr. Dundas, we indeed find, these words: 66 every man, almoft without exception, has voted:" but the words, almoft without exception, had we no other evidence, might be perhaps fufficient to fhew that the elections were not conducted on the principle of univerfal fuffrage. Sir Gilbert, however, is not filent on this head, for he tells us that it was property alone that gave the right of voting; nay, more, that it was property in lands: at the fame time, he informs us that this kind of property was fo generally divided, or, to use his own words, "the ftate of property being fuch, that although none but landholders were electors, every man, almost without exception, has voted." Hence it is clear that Mr. Pitt has not given into the idea of univerfal fuffrage, as it is evident that the qualification for a vote in Cortica, (we must except, we prefume, the towns,) can be acquired only by a tenure of land: but whether it is as proprietor or occupier that the voter becomes qualified, we cannot decide. Our author is therefore far from being correct when he fays (p. 45):

Thus from the noble Text of his MAJESTY, and the faithful obedience of his Plenipo to have it executed in the general manner just quoted, we may almost venture to conclude, Sir, that the Royal Mafter, and the approved good fervant, were zealous friends, in the

Y 4

prefent

prefent inftance, at leaft, of Corfican-Representation, to UNIVERSAL SUFFRAGE.'

None, we fee, can be either electors or elected, who do not poffefs property in land; to which must be fuperadded refidence for a year in the place for which they are voters or candidates.

Whenever the bufinefs of reform is feriously taken up in England, we prefume that it will not be thought fufficient to afcertain to whom the right of voting fhall be extended, but that it will be deemed neceffary to declare that the number of reprefentatives, to be chofen for any particular diftrict, shall be proportioned to its population; or, in other words, that for so many hundred or thousand electors, there fhall be fo many members elected. Thus the prefent unaccountable disproportion will vanish; and, until this be done, though the right of univerfal fuffrage fhould obtain, we cannot be faid to have an equal reprefentation. Our author has fet this matter in a very clear point of view:

The injuftice as well as abfurdity of this difproportion of Delegates to the proportion of Electors, cannot more glaringly be exhibited or more forcibly expofed, even to the comprehenfion and conviction of the most humble capacity, than by the following table:

The difproportion that ftrikes the eye in the above table would become infinitely greater, if every housekeeper in the above places poffeffed the right of voting.

The author feems to have overlooked one circumstance in the Corfican reprefentation, which, had he duly attended to it, might perhaps have a little weakened his partiality to that

fyftem.

fyftem. It ftruck us very forcibly when we read the following article in the new Conftitution of Corfica:

"That no perfon shall be elected a member of Parliament, unless he poffeffes at least 6,000 livres (about 300l.) per ann. in land in the Pieve which he is to reprefent, and pays taxes in proportion to this poffeffion, and unless born of a Corfican father, and bona fide an inhabitant, having kept houfe for five years in the said Pieve, and until he has arrived at the age of twenty-five."

Such an article as this, in a fyftem of reprefentation for England, would not alarm us, because the number of perfons, not connected with the aristocracy, yet poffeffing 300l. a-year, is very great; and confequently the electors could not be limited to a small circle for the choice of reprefentatives :-but in Corfica, 300l. a year is a very large revenue; the whole ifland is not more than 110 miles in length, and 50 in breadth; its population is confiderably under 200,000 inhabitants; and it has little or no trade: fo that thofe who poffefs 300l. a-year in lands must be very few in number, and perfons of old or noble families. Hence it follows that, let the electors be who they may, the elected can be taken only from the body of the ariftocracy; and no doubt many individuals, if this fyftem fhould continue, will, though elected biennially, poffefs in reality an bereditary feat in the Corfican parliament.

The author prides himself not a little on having started a new reflection, by obferving that in England and Ireland the conftituents and reprefentatives ftand not on even ground with refpect to prosecution and punishment for mutual misconduct: the inequality of their fituations is thus expreffed by him:

The fact is, that the great measure of a Reform in the Reprefentative Body of the nation is not attainable, however juft and neceffary, through the medium or force of any exifting laws. It depends entirely, in the immediate inftance, on the mere grace of the Legislature. Hence it is not unworthy of remark, that the PEOPLE and the LEGISLATURE do not ftand, in this effential bufinefs, on equally fair ground.This is manifeft from the confideration, that the former are fubject to indictment and punishment, at the profecution of the Executive Power, fhould they attempt, by illegal modes, a Reform or recovery of their conftitutional rights: whereas the Legislature, or more pertinently fpeaking to our prefent point, the Reprefentatives of the Nation, are not profecutable, by any law, at the fuit of the People, fhould they betray the truft repofed in them by their conftituents, or act ever fo unjustly in with-holding from them the necef. fary Reformation they folicit.

One of the great boafts of what is termed the moft GLORIOUS CONSTITUTION in the world is-that it affords law for the beggar as well as the KING:-but in the cafe, at prefent under confideration, 'tis palpably clear, that there are laws for punishing illegal proceedings of Conftituents towards their Reprefentatives, but none for

5

punishing

punishing the misconduct, (however notoriously influenced by venal motives) of a Reprefentative towards his Conflituents.'

In our opinion, the author would not find this inequality fo friking, perhaps he could not find it at all, if he had properly defined the terms People and Legislature. In their collective capacity, neither can be profecuted nor punished; in their individual capacities, both may. If fome individuals affemble to bring about a reform, or any other meafure, by force or violence, they certainly might and would be indicted: but, were the whole people with one voice to call for and infift on having a parliamentary reform, who could indict them, where could grand juries be found to return bills against them, where petit juries to try them, where the poffe comitatus to enable the sheriffs to carry the verdicts into effect? Against the Legiflature, the law could not have provided any proceeding; becaufe, exerciling the fovereignty of the ftate, it could not be liable to punishment. Against the Houfe of Commons no action is given to the people; because the people, by the conftitution, are fuppofed to be there aflembled; and it would be abfurd to give a man an action against himfelf. Should an individual member offend against the law, he is as punifhable as any of his conftituents: fhould he be convicted of bribery or corruption in getting into parliament, there are laws for inflicting pretty fevere penalties on him; and fhould he be proved to have fold his vote in the houfe, he is liable to imprisonment, and finally to expulfion. Such proceedings are perhaps not fo frequent as fome people think they might be: but inftances of the kind have occurred, as appears from the Journals of the Houfe of Commons.

In the pamphlet before us we see much to approve, and little to condemn: but we must confefs that in one place, at least, we difcover fymptoms of fomething bordering on an approbation of the idea of paffing-by parliament, and calling on the people to take the bufinefs of reform into their own hands. We allude to the following paffage: No folecifm, (fays our author, page 9,) can be more grofs than to imagine that corruption will purify itself.' In this fhort fentence, our imagination, without being over-lively, or very ready to catch alarms, fees the poffibility of disturbance, confufion, and civil war, if the idea which it conveys were entertained by a great body of men. When the people move, there is no power in the ftate to stop them. Nothing, it is true, but great provocation, and a conviction that redrefs could not otherwife be obtained, would ever make them rife: but, when once rifen, nothing but their own moderation could make them put an end to their movement, and fit down in peace. Moderation from millions is what may rather be wished than expected; and, before it should begin to act, much mischief

might be done. On the other hand, we believe that parliament will not reform itself, until it fhall appear to be the general fenfe of the people that it should. Let that sense be once fairly and clearly expreffed by petitions or addreffes, and all oppofition to reform muft die away within the walls of St. Stephen's chapel. The people never yet spoke in vain: but, if parliament hear the voice only of this or that fociety, is it to blame for not confidering it as the voice of the people? Let the counties, the cities, the towns, explain themselves clearly on the subject; and we will not hesitate to give it as our opinion that their wishes, whatever they may be, will prevail, without tumult, confufion, or ftrife; for furely no minifter would ever be hardy enough to advife his fovereign to refift the general fenfe of the nation; or, could fuch a minifter ever arife, he certainly will never find a king either weak or mad enough to follow his advice.

ART. XV. An Effay on the Picturefque, as compared with the Sublime and the Beautiful; and on the Ufe of ftudying Pictures, for the Purpofe of improving real Landscape. By Uvedale Price, Esq. 8vo. pp. 288. 5s. Boards. Robfon. 1794.

WE

E fhall fay the lefs of this effay, here, as the extracts, which will be found in the two following articles, will fpeak our fentiments of it with better effect than any which our own affertions could fingly produce. Its origin and hiftory are given by the Author in his Preface:

This unfinished work (and fuch, I fear, it is in every respect) I did not intend publifhing till it was more complete, and till I had endeavoured, at leaft, to render it more worthy the public infpection. I have, however, been induced to fend it into the world earlier than I wifhed, from the general curiofity which my friend Mr. Knight poem has awakened on the subject.

It would have been more prudent in me not to have afforded the public fuch an opportunity of judging, how much I am indebted to the effufion of friendship and poetry, for the high compliment he has paid me; were I now to fay what I feel about my friend's poem, it might appear like a return of compliment; and whatever could in any way be fo mifconftrued, would be equally unworthy of us both.

I cannot however, refift the fatisfaction of mentioning one circumftance, highly flattering to me, as it accounts for my not chufing to delay this publication. I had mentioned to Mr. Knight that I had written fome papers on the prefent ftyle of improvement, but that I defpaired of ever getting them. ready for the prefs; though I was very anxious that the abfurdities of that ftyle fhould be expofed. Upon this he conceived the idea of a poem on the fame fubje&; and having all his materials arranged in his mind, from that activity and perfeverance which so strongly marked his character, he never delayed or abandoned the execution till the whole was completed. When it

Sh.

was