Star.
London, England, 1808-03-25 00:00:00

PARLLIMENT4Rr PROCEEDINGS.

HOUSE OF LORDS, MARCH 24.
DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE.
Lord SUFFOLK moved for the production of certain papers,
that had passed between Mr. Garlicke and his Majesty's Ministers
respecting the political relations of the Court of Denmark with
this Country, prior to our attack on Copenhagen. He said that
it was, on various considerations, necessary that those Papers
should be laid before the House, in order that the public charac-
ter of Mr. Garlicke might be fully investigated by that House,
and that the policy and justice of our hostility against Denmark
might be ascertained. The Papers would, no doubt, occasion a
considerable discussion ; and he felt it unnecessary to assign more
reasons for their production, as they were already laid before the
other House.
Lord HAWKESBURY could not understand what sort of dis-
cussion the Noble Lord expected to take place when the Papers
should be produced, as the House had already discussed the subject
so often, and in so many shapes. With respect to the personal
character of Mr. Garlicke, he did not feel it necessary to dwell
at any length upon it, as he did not hear of any imputation having
been.cast upon him. He originally became acquainted with that
respectable Gentleman during his connection with a Noble Lord
(Grenville), wbo then sat opposite, and from that period 1w had
uniformly recomme"ded him to his Sovereign as a fit and proper
person to execute the diplomatic duties, wherewith he had been
entrusted.
Lord GREY spoke at great length in support of the motion,
and maintained, that if the Correspondence should be produced,
the House would be perfectly satisfied of the impolicy and injus-
tice of our rupture with Denmark. To the attack on Copenhagen
be attributed the present war in which the King of Sweden was
engaged ; and he hoped that Monarch, instead of persisting in
a hopeless contest, would purchase any sort of Peace, even with
'the subsidies that we had agreed to send him.

Lord AUCKLAND supported the motion.
Lotd HAWKESBURY, in explanation, said that no argu-
ments could be built in that House on proceedings that were said
to have been had In another place. He added, that if the House
should, however, agree to th.t motion, ha should have no objec-
tion to vindicate his Right Hou. Colleague from the unconstitu-
tional conduct that had been imputed to him.
Lord GRENVILLE supported the motion. He highly disap-
proved of the conduct of a Secretary of State reading garbled and
partial extracts, and refusing to produce the whole—and also for
the manner in which he afterwards produced what he formerly
withheld. He could not, however, attribute such conduct to
i Lord Hawkesbury ; and he was not therecure disposed to say
' more at that time upon the subject.
Lord HOLLAND supported the motion, and Lord NAR-
ROWBY opposed it.
The question being put, the motion was negatived.
ORDERS IN COUNCIL. BILL.

Lord HAWKESBURY moved the order of the day for the
House going into a Comr. tit con the Orders in Council Bill, when
Lord AUCKLAND said, that std.:Hem information un the
subject was not then before the Hou.:e. He therefore moved,
that an Address should be presented to his Majesty, that he would
be graciously pleased to order copies of the List five Orders in
Council to be laid before the House ; which was agreed to without

opposition.
The House then went into a Committee, when a long discus-
sion took place between the Lord Chancellor, Lords Hawkes-
bury, Redesdale, Bathurst, Grenville, Grey, Holland, Lauder-
dale, Darnley, Spencer, and Auckland—during which several
amendments were proposed and negatived.
The remaining clauses of the Bill were then disposed of, the
Report of the Committee was received, and the third reading of
the Bill appointed for this day.
Adjourned at Half-past One o'clock.