taken, and which he
so energetically performed, was now in constitution a worn-out man.
The burden of office was too great for his strength; and it had become
manifest that he would never arrive at the allotted age of man.

DEBATE ON THE RUPTURE WITH SPAIN.

In the month of February a debate took place on the rupture with Spain.
Opposition endeavoured to prove that it arose from our attack on its
frigates, before recorded. Ministers, they said, had rushed into this
war unnecessarily; and Lord Grenville reprobated the act of attacking
the frigates of Spain, as contrary to all the laws of civilized warfare.
"No capture of treasure," he remarked, "could wash away the stain of
innocent blood thus brought on our arms." Ministers replied that Spain,
by her treaties with France, in which she bound herself to furnish, on
demand and without demur or inquiry into the justice or policy of the
war, a certain aid of ships and men to France, became a principal in
the war--an argument which could not be refuted. It was plain to all
the world, indeed, that Spain intended to declare war as soon as her
treasure-ships arrived at Cadiz; she had, in truth, no alternative,
for the Spanish government was under the vassalage and dictation of the
ruler of France.

CLAIMS OF THE CATHOLICS.

In the debate on the address in the commons, Pitt had been reminded that
he had done nothing to redeem the pledge which he was understood to have
given to the Roman Catholics. In his reply the prime minister stated,
that on a future occasion he should have an opportunity of explaining
what had induced him to let their claims remain unsatisfied, and that he
had no doubt the house would then, for the reasons he should give, give
him credit for consistency. Notwithstanding this assurance, petitions,
praying relief from civil disabilities, were presented by Lord Grenville
in the lords, and by Fox in the commons. Pitt, however, declared that
existing circumstances were unfavourable to their request; and it was
accordingly rejected by large majorities. As he resigned office because
he could not compel the king to grant the claims of the Roman Catholics,
and as he resumed it with an acquiescence in their disabilities, Pitt's
character has been vehemently attacked on this question--he stands
charged with sacrificing principle to ambition. There is no good reason
for such a charge: it is evident that Pitt did intend bringing this
question before the ho