Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-06-08
SCANDINAVIAN UNION
COALITION AND DISSENSION OF
SWEDEN AND NORWAY.
Reason of Norwegians' Discomfort
With Pact-Growth of Separatist
Sentiment.
Charles stirrup. in Pail Mall Gazette, May "a.

| Charles stirrup in Pail Mall Gazette. May "a.
There can no longer be any doubt that
the union between Sweden and Norway,
| which when it was established in 1914 was
declared to be ''indissoluble and irrevoc-
able, Is In great danger of coming to an
end. The Norwegians have never taken to
II kindly; the Swedes are absolutely weary
| Of the interminable dissensions between the
two countries, or, as they prefer to put it, Of
the complaints of their Norwegian fellow
subjects of King Oscar IN May IS a bill
was adopted unanimously by the Nor
wegian odelsthing, and before the end of
the month will have been passed by the
lagthing, which aims directly at what has
been described as the sine qua non of the
existence of the union.
This bill seeks to establish a separate and
independent Norwegian consular service.
Although it is somewhat difficult to form a
just estimate of the rights and wrongs OF
the Scandinavian trouble, it is easy enough
to understand the attitude which Norway
has taken up. The act of union expressly
guarantees that Norway is "a free, indie
pendent, indivsible, and inalienabe king
dom, and this fact the Norwegians never
lose sight Of. A proud, brave, and spirited
people, different in race, language and
ideals from the Swedes, they very bitterly
resent any suggestion of any ind cation that
oWSuSil 10 lie predominant partner. I1ey
claim absolute equality, but persistently de-
clare that they do not enjoy that liberty
OF action to which they are entitled. 1t is
now about four centuries since Norway had
direct and Independent political intercourse
with foreign nations. Previous to 1914 Dem
mark held the suZerainty over the country
and since the union with Sweden-a union
be it remembered. which was forced upon
Norway-the Swedish minister of foreign
affairs has acted on behalf of the two coun-
tries. At first Norway raised no objection
to this; indeed, the circumstance developed
naturally, for Norways foreign relations
were of the smallest and most unmpertant
kind. But apart from the fact that the
King of Sweden was also the King of Nor
way, there was not, and there is not any
other bond worth speaking of between the
two countries but this of one foreign secre-
tary acting on behalf of both, as If they
formed single state AS time went
Norway became very dissatisfied with this
arrangement, and not without good reason.
She had failed to make her independence
clear to the diplomatic world and she found
herself in a decidedly secondary position.
For, after all, it was only to be expected
that a Swedish minister would act in ac-
cordance with Swedish ideas and ambi-
tons. The Norwegians declare that Nor
way has never been properly considered
in diplomatic affairs. and the Swedes re-
tort that the Norwegian view is altogether
too restricted and that 1t never takes into
consideration the best interests of the two
countries together. There seems to be a
considerable amount OF truth In both OF
these arguments, but however that may be,
certain it is that as Norway became more
prosperous her dissatisfaction became more
acute. ----..
Consular Service Agitation.
1t was in 1891 that the Norwegian agita-
ton behalf of independent consular
service first seemed to have some chance
of success. The government had proposed
certain notifications OF the existing sys-
tenn, but. having been accused by the oppo-
sition of conserving to a Swedish minister
for foreign affairs, was defeated. A new
ministry was formed, and having placed
at the head of the program a claim for
independent or separate foreign representa-
ton for Norway, gainedsa great triumph
at the elections. This project was natur-
ally strongly objected to by the Swedish
government, but early in 1892 the storthing
passed resolution favoring the establish
ment of separate Norwegian consuls de-
claring that this was necessary for the
free development of the Industrial and COM
mercial life of the country" King Oscar
was strongly appealed to by both sides and
was placed in position of much difficulty,
but Swedish influence prevailed. He eXer-
cised the right of veto, and the consular
question, after much political excitement.
fell into allegiance. But not for long. The
foreign minister, speaking on behalf of the
Swedish government, said that the question
could only be dealt with by the joint coun-
ell of state of the two countries and added
tndl d joint represent was
necessary If the union was to be main
tanned, and that the Office of foreign minis
ter could be held indifferently by a Swede
or a Norwegian. This was concession on
the part of Sweden and showed a desire
for Cancellation, but the Norwegian radi-
calls. who had gone out of office but were
in a majority, saw in 1t nothing but a
snare, and emphasized their views by a
resolution In parliament They went still
further. They succeeded in inducing par
Lament to request the government to give
notice that the joint consular service was
to be terminated at the close of the year
1894 but King Oscar declared that he
would not give his sanction to such q reso
luton a decision which provoked the Nor
wegian agitators to language even more
violent than they had used hitherto.
The Union Committee.
The elections of 1894 left conservatives
and radicals in the Norwegian storthng
almost equal in strength, the latter having
only a small majority of four, and this en-
abled King Oscar, who all along had shown
firmness and tact, to take up a more de-
termined attitude The embittered feelings
between the two countries naturally re-
manned In full force, but late in 1895 the
Swedish and Norwegian governments ar
ranged for union committee of fourteen
each government nominating seven men,
bers-to consider the whole question at
issue 1t was hoped that this committee
would succeed in coming TO a decision
which would be generally acceptable and
the political tension was relieved very cen
siderably. 1t was not until March, 1oyS,
that the committee brought its delibera-
tons to e close and made its report.
This report was extremely disappointing,
for the members had ranged themselves
into four antagonistic groups. each advo-
eating different views. Once more. there
fore, were Norway and Sweden plunged
into political turmoil. A radical govern
ment had come into power in Norway. and
SO extremely hostile was its attitude that
1t decided that the mark of the union
should be removed from the Norwegian
flag. a resolution which exasperated every
section Of the Swedish nation. King Oscar,
though acting in opposition to the foreign
minister, decreed. much against his will,
that the flag act should be promulgated,
but as the act had been passed three