STATEMENT-1: The standard reduction potentlal of `M^(n^(+))//M` electrode increases with increase in activity of `M^(n+)` ion.
and STATEMENT-2: The standard reduction potential is given by: `E_(RP)=E_(RP)^@+(0.059)/(n) log [M^(n+1)]`

Options

A. STATEMENT-1 is True, STATEMENT-2 is True, STATEMENT -2 is correct explanation for STATEMENT-1
B. STATEMENT 1 is True, STATEMENT-2 Is True, STATEMENT -2 is NOT a correct explanation for STATEMENT-1
C. STATEMENT - 1 is True, STATEMENT-2 is False
D. STATEMENT-1 is False, STATEMENT-2 is True

Answer

To solve the question, we need to analyze both statements and determine their validity and relationship.

### Step-by-step Solution:

1. **Understanding Statement 1**:
- Statement 1 claims that the standard reduction potential of the `M^(n+) / M` electrode increases with an increase in the activity of `M^(n+)` ions.
- The standard reduction potential (E°) is influenced by the concentration (or activity) of the ions involved in the half-reaction.

2. **Understanding Statement 2**:
- Statement 2 provides the equation for standard reduction potential:
\[ E_{RP} = E_{RP}^0 + \frac{0.059}{n} \log [M^{n+}] \]
- Here, \(E_{RP}^0\) is the standard reduction potential, \(n\) is the number of electrons involved in the reduction, and \([M^{n+}]\) is the concentration of the ion.

3. **Analyzing the Relationship**:
- From the equation in Statement 2, we can see that as the concentration (or activity) of `M^(n+)` increases, the logarithmic term \(\log [M^{n+}]\) becomes larger, which results in an increase in \(E_{RP}\).
- This confirms that an increase in the activity of `M^(n+)` leads to an increase in the standard reduction potential.

4. **Conclusion**:
- Both statements are true. Statement 1 correctly describes the relationship between the standard reduction potential and the activity of the ion, and Statement 2 provides the correct equation that explains this relationship.
- Therefore, Statement 2 is the correct explanation of Statement 1.

### Final Answer:
Both statements are true, and Statement 2 is the correct explanation of Statement 1.