The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1905-07-07

A pro-SWedish presentation of the
dispute between the two Scandina-
Wan ; countries is given in a recent arti-
Gle BY DR.. Carl Sundbeck, an eminent
SWed1sh scholar well known in this
country, where he travelled some years
ago for purposes Of study.
1T. Sundbeck takes the position that
Norway at the time of the union in
1914 held the position Of q. yassal state
and nd has been raised by Swedish con
ces s:le'[ to the basis of equality. He
reviews the circumstances Of the union
and takes direct issue with the state
ments OF Dr.. Nansen on the same sub
lect. He says that the union does not
date from the formal acknowledge
ment by Norway, Nov. 4, 1914, but
from the treaty of Kiel, Jan. IA, Of the
same year, when Denmark ceded Nor
way to Sweden in return for Pomer-
anla: Russia had taken Finland from
Sweden and assisted in coercing Den
mark to make this cession with the idea
OF compromising the Swedes for Fin
land. After campaign Of a month.
there was a truce Dec Is, 1918, and
this resulted in the treaty of Jan. ID
following.
Norway, says DR.. Sundbeck, had
been vassal state under Denmark
from 1895 till 1860, when it became an
integral part of the Danish N orwegian
realm. 1t was in that position, he CON
tends, in 1914, 50 the Danish king had
g perfect right to cede Norway to
Sweden, as he was forced to do. DR..
Sundbeck relates the circumstances Of
the union as follows:
Version Of Union Terms
When the Swedish armies returned to
continue the war against Napoleon, the
!, NorWeg1ans seized the opportunity to
rebel against Sweden They even went
50 far as to declare themselves indie
pendent and elected as their own king
the former Danish governor, Prince Chris
tian Frederick. This occurred Nav IL
1874. On the same day they adopted a
constitution Of their own Neither the
king nor the constitution obtained recog-
milton. On the contrary, there arrived
IN Christiania on June 80 Of the same
year delegates from Austria, Russia, Eng
land and Prussia who announced the de-
c1slon of their respective governments
that Norway ought to be united with
Sweden in conformity with the treaty OF
peace at Kiel. The Norwegians, however
held to their plan of separation. On July
30, Swedish troops were sent into Norway
and Aug. the way to Christiania was
laid open to them by the surrender O.
F'redriksstad. This was reported to Prince
Frederick by the Norwegian com
manders and on the 18th O.
| August hostilities ceased and thu
treaty Of Moss was agreed to- The Swed
ish* king promised the Norwegians tina
they should retain their constitution bu
with amendments made necessary by thu
union of Norway and Sweden.
| Matters in Norway had to be arranged
| in conformity with the new situation, bu
it is self-evident% that no one in Swedel
at this time, in view of the course o
events, thought the treaty Of Kiel, b,
which Norway had been coded to Sweden
| had ceased to be valid. On the contrary, i
was held ytos havegsbeen affirmed. Thu
Norwegians maintained, however, tina
their country as an independent state hat
entered into a voluntary union wit
Sweden In order to avoid another ap
peal to arms and to have peace restored
| before the impending congress in Vienna
various vague expressions were used II
speaking of the relations between tn
| two countries. - -. !.