Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1905-07-12
THE SCANDINAVIAN ESTRANGEMENT.

| Norway and Sweden nave been
brought to the verge of war by the
dissolution on the part of Norway of
the union SO long existing between
them. There are many of our readers
who do not understand yhe exact
nature of the causes which led to the
estrangement, and for their informa-
tion we publish the statement of DR..
Fridtjof Nansen. the great Norwegian
explorer, which gives concise history
of the situation:
Representatives of Norway in
May. 1914. agreed upon a 9 md ".
which forms the basis of the pres It
Norwegian constitution. At che time
union with Sweden was not contem-
plated.
There is nothing in either the Nor
wegian or Swedish grundlov of the
nature Of treaty or union. All that
concerned the two countries jointly
was embodied in special treaty, the
rigsakt. adopted in August. 1915. 1t
had previously been decided that Nor
way and Sweden should be united as
two free and independent Kingdoms"
under one sovereign. The rigsakt
contains no mention of consul and the
two countries are not bound, legally
or morally. to have them in common.
The Norwegian grundlov. adopted
before the rigsakt. deals with the con-
sui question, and it was certainly
therefore the intention that Norway
should have her own cOnsuls. Just
before the union took effect the
Swedish king gave his assent to the
Norwegian grundlov The partner
ship as to cOnsuls is not obligatory,
but finds it's sanction in a statement
in the grundlov that foreigners may
serve as consuls, practice. of course.
that is adopted by all states. 'Swedes
were. therefore. competent to act as
Norwegian consuls. Norway never
surrendered the right to appoint her
own consuls. The Swedes maintain
that the appointment of consuls is a
part OF the political union. This is
demonstratably and historically in
correct.
In the SOS Sweden began to adopt
a high tariff policy, while Norway
remained an almost free trade country.
A consul therefore, had to do nothing
at all, or to forward the one lands in
terest at the expense of the other.
With Swedish foreign minister at
the head of affairs that expense has
probably been NOrway's.
Sentiment in favor of separate Nor
wegian consuls took definite shape in
1885, when Sweden. by a change in
her grundlov. gained complete control
of the foreign affairs of the two
kingdoms. Attempts by Norway to
reestablish the equilibrium led to
nothing. An especial effort made in
1891 failed because Sweden led off the
preliminary negotiations with the
offensive suggestion that Norway
should not expect to take part in for
eign affairs. This brought the con-
sular question into practical politics.
All parties in Norway were united in
the demand tor separate consuls.
A committee representing both con-
tries endeeavOred in 1898 to adjust
both the question of foreign affairs
and consular affairs and consular SER
vice. but failed to reach an agreement.
In 1902 a similar committee was ap-
pointed to consider only the question
of consuls. The members of this COM
mittee unanimously agreed that it was
possible to lave separate consuls. This
agreement was ratified by both con-
tries and signed by the king in 1908.
Sweden. however. took no steps to
carry the resolution into effect and
finally put forward number of con-
ditions that were tantamont to a
rupture of the negotiation.
In effect, the Swedish government
went back on is pledged word.
We have repeatedly discussed the
question with Sweden and all these
negotiations have been barren of re-
suits.
History has taught us it's lesson.
We have tried all possible courses to
settlement there is no choice remain
ing. We must see TO it that our right
in this our own affair is respected.