The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-06-14
SWEDISH KING
WRITES LETTER
Vigorously Defends the PrerOgative
of His Office.
CONSTITUTION Is QUOTED
FEELS JUSTIFIED IN VETOING
CONSULAR BILL.

Stockholm, Sweden, June liking
Oscar. in long and vigorOusly-wOrded
letter to the president of the Nor
wegian storthing, NJ. Bernsr, declares
/ that the accession oath of Norway :
king makes it the kings duty not to
! pass over in silence the preferment Of
the Norwegian council of state on the
occasion of his maj sty's veto of the
consular bill The king maintains that
he did not oversteD his prer0gatives
under the constitution, and says that
consideration for the union imposes on
the king the duty of exercising his con-
stitutional rights
The king Of Norway" he adds,
must always bear in mind paragraph
! Of the Norwegian constitution, which
reads;
" The kingdom Of Norway is free,
autonomous, independent and indivis-
IDLE
Feels Justified.
I feel myself justified in demanding
respect for the decision taken by the
king of Norway in accordance with the
constitution. The powers which the
constitution places at the disposal of
the Norwegian king in order to enable
him to promote the welfare Of the
country according to his convictions
are no greater than those which must
be reserved to the monarchy united
with Sweden under one king"
After IengthiIy repudiating the dec
laration Of the council of state that his
veto was unconstitutional because no
member of the council regarded himself
as being in a position to countersign
if, King Oscar proceeds;
King Not Mere Tool.
zone of the fundamental principles
of the constitution. and a fact that is
most important is that Norway shall
be a constitutional monarchy. 1t is
clearly Incompatible herewith that the
king sink to the position of a mere
tool in the hands Of the state council.
If the members of the council of state,
by refusing to cOuntersign any of the
royal decisions could prevent them
from having force. the king Of Norway
would be excluded from participation
I'm the state administration. Such a
situation would be as degrading to the
monarch as harmful to Norway. The
position of the king as a monarch of
the united kingdom Of Sweden and
Norway makes il incumbent upon him
not to prejudice as monarch of one
kingdom questions affecting the other
kingdom
Duty OF the Monarch.
The duty of the king on this point
cannot be reconciled with the view that
one kingdom. through the refusal of its
council Of state TO append a counter
signature. can annul the royal judg-
ment. wherein the king refuses to give
decision prejudicial to the other king
dom. and injurious to the union.
The Norwegian people and the Nor
wegian nation demand the right to
force the king to give a decision which
in his opinion conflicts with the duty
as monarch of the united Kingdoms and
king of Sweden: therefore. the king of
Sweden must become altogether de-
pendent. as r. CARDS his decisions. upon
the viii of the Norwegian nation
through its council of sta;s-
Ties Indissoluble.
such a position for the k,ngiy power
can only describe as being Trecon-
ciiable with the laws of tn union laid
down IN the riksakt tt5e ChaTtsr pro-
mJIgated in 1915 and beng now funda
mental laws in the terms Of tEt two
Usited kingdoms be ifldissoluhle and
i'll CvocabIe without 5rajudice - the
separate government constitution and
laws Of either Sweden or Norway
My endeaVOr has always been 10
s'vc Norway that place within the
uricn to which she can rightly lay
cam. Ny royal duty . the uniJn re-
CUir.ss me to endeavor 10 uphold -
legal basis, even when b. so doing 1
come into opposition WITH the NUr-
wesisn nation4 SAslinsT
and which has regard for the welfare
o. the united kinsdoms, determined my