Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-07-16
NORWAY AND SWEDEN
Causes Leading Up to Pres
ent Crisis.
sp,cln- co-re.nondencs Of The Star.

spcclal Correspondence Of The Star.
CIIRISTIANIA, July Z, 1905.
Bjornstciru Bjornsen, the famous Nor
wegiau writer, thus reviews the causes
leading up TO the present crisis between
Norway and Sweden:
The manner In which the Norwegians
have broken off The union with Sweden may
not be approved. But / would like that
aspect of the question to be set aside, for
the rupture in itself is as much a blessing
for Sweden as for Norway. 1t was the only
possible course toward an understanding
among the three Scandinavian peoples. For
the time being the Swedcs object forcIbly
10 the secession but circumstances are
stronger Than men,
eve We're united 20 Sweden IL 1S1i, under
one king The question which has resulted
IN the c'cagl z. first arouse IN 1877. y note
worthy fact is that England, by an unjust
act started thc struggle. An English trad
ing firm VS. caught smv ggling In Rodo.
Nordland. by means of forged documents
the English government induced the SWcd-
ish minister of foreign affairs TO believe that
damages We're due from the Norwegian
government FOR the coudscation o. goods
and imprisonment Of persons. The swedish
foreign office was frightened into yielding.
and Norway was most unjustly compelled
TO pay subsequently great Indignation was
fet In Norway when II WAS iuANN WIFI
what CHTeleSSutsS Swedish diplomacy had
treated our interests. and Swedish tutelIge
was hotly denounced. Sweden had usurped
authority granted neither by the Norw- glan
constitution nor by the act of the union.
4 VIII mention some Of the Norwegian
claims which Sweden contested. That equal
Importance should be given to both king
Goms IN the seal of the union; that Norway
should have her own standard; that in Nor
way Norway and Sweden should be spoken
OF instead of the reverse; that Swedish gov
eTuors OF Norway should no longer be ap-
pointed such appointment reduced our
country to the level of province. Sweden
eventually gave way on all of these points
after holding OIt Tor long time.
''Nurw"giaus We're appointed Ia the DIP
lomatic ana consular corps. Nevertheless.
We could not obtain what We had most at
hcart-the solo direction of our own foreign
affairs. y Swedish and Norwegian commits
sion was named which sat from 1850 10
1869. The Swedish members insisted that
in return for other concessions Norway
should recognize the Swedish m mister of
Foreign affairs minister of the same de-
partment for Norway also. The Norwegian
storthnE rejected the proposal In 1865
Sweden settled by law the question of our
foreign affairs. which until then had been
royal prerogative. II was iutruSted to
the Swedish minister of foreign affairs We
saw i'm this violation of our rights. To
our reiterated request for share in the di-
reCtiun Of the foreign policy was opposed
the same answer, that We had to recognize
the Swedish minister. In 1898 there was
aHCthCI mixed commission, which divided
Itself into several factions. The work re-
NAMED abprttVr and without result. Last
of all we witnessed an abortive attempt to
give consular representation to each king
dom. This time the project emanated from
Sweden. Tut she laid down conditions at
the last moment that free state could not
accept The patience of the Norwegians was
exhausted
Embarrassment Caused.
Add to those reasons for discomfort the
embarrassment caused to Us by the inter-
ference. through the medium of the king,
cf The Swedish government In the develop
m,Et of oar home policy, which gave UNI
bragg e. our neshbo.s. More than once
had our government TO complain of the
Eile having adopted, without consulting us.
resolutions which hamrered and retarded
Tie establishment in Norway of parl:a-
m,utary regime, based on universal SUI
fTagv. From the day on which Norway
had d-creed the abolition of nobility 0S2D
uuJl the hour when she rejected the abso-
lutte Veto of thu king uSS4) the ruling men
IN Sweden sought to exercise influence in
our country.
'rh@ most simple explanation of tie dis
Iutcs which have arisen from the union Is
that The TWO peoples are very d fferent and
are not intended to 90 hand-in-hand. The
majority of the Norwegians have long had
lOF lutlT motto, complete independence,
with the maintenance Of the union. or sep
RrauOn. Things had got 10 such a pass
that everybody said. we shall never OBJ
tain complete independence while maintain
ing the union, We must break IT The
method adopted TO bring about the rupture
was certainly not the best. But apparently
st could not be helped The storthing de
cided on getting the law on the cOnsuates
through. Our constitution empowered 1t to
do SO. The law was adopted unanimously
and submitted TO the king. The members
OF the cabinet We're unanimous in advising
him 10 sanction IT. lie refused. adding nay
IL would then be impossible for him TO form
"a new ministry in Norway, the old one hav-
ing resigned. He also refused TO proceed to
Norway. Under these circumstances the
stoTth.ng declared that a constitutional
sovereign without a ministry had ceased to
reign The union was based on the com
munity of the sovereign; il had ceased to
exist Every one adopted this view Only
one official declined TO execute the orders
resulting from the new state of things
The Norwegian nation is certainly re-
publican in spirit. Yet as a mark of es-
teen TO the Swedish dynasty and nation II
mad asked King Oscar to allow a member
OF his family to become King of Norway
The old sovereign IS deeply hurt He has
spoken in violent terms of all that has hap
ptnro II Is possible that he is In a state
OF mind where he would object To- his son
or grandson reigning in Norway | think
tLdt pubic feeling Is really for a republic
When the three peoples of the north-thc
Danes. Norwegians and Swedcs-are eouaIlv
independent of each other they viii he
nearer 10 seeking Il solution In good hnr-
mOny and solidarity"