Morris tribune., 1908-04-18

Christian Nicholson undertook, after
his brilliant success in uniting all
shades of political opinion in support
has proved impossible of performance.
The great premier believed he could
have built up a strong moderate party
of the center which would govern
Norway. Forced by i'll health to give
up public life he turned over his task
to J. G. Loveland. his minister of for
eign affairs. At the time the original
cabinet had dropped one by one, un-
til of their number only S. B. Arctan-
| der and Mr.. Loveland remained.
Premier Loveland announced that he
would steer the liberal course. but in
the same breath he adhered to the
Nicholson policy. This Inconsistency
seems to have been the chief cause of
his downfall, the radical liberals and
the socialists uniting in the close vote
by which lack of confidence was
shown. Gunnar Knudson, the chief
of the new cabinet, was also a mem
Der of the original Nicholson cabinet,
as minister of finance. He is radi'
cal and a tariff reformer. His minis
try, however, is not supported by the
socialists, and can count with certain
ty upon the votes of but IS liberals
out of total membership in the
storthing of 1913. He will be forced
to govern under these untoward condf-
tons until the elections Of 1909 indi-
cate with clearness the desires of the
Norwegian people, as between the
radicals and the moderates. Mean
while, the socialists hold the balance
of power. The situation illustrates
how quickly partisan issues arise
and partisan feeling develops in a
without which had produced a pa
triotic solidarity has been removed. 1t
is necessary and healthful that there
should be party divisions in Norway.
Mr.. Nicholson postponed them for
some time by the brilliance of his
achievements in the time OF the crisis.
and by the strong hold he had on the
admiration and love of the people. But
his more intellectual, though less pop
ular colleague, Mr.. Loveland, has
found himself unable to maintain the
Nicholson tradition. When the issues
have been more sharply defined, they
will be fought out on the musings"
and a new government with new
mandate from the people will take the
helm.
Interesting speculation has arisen
all over northern Europe as result
of the announcement from Norway
that the authorities there have decreed
that when husband and wife are
travelling together the latter need pay
only half fare. Some persons are
pointing out that the new ruling IS
a most equitable one, since it is mani
testify fair that two persons who are
in reality one should be privileged to
travel on one ticket. Englishmen, for
instance, who look for reason and
precedent for everything in history
however, cannot profess to beiev"
that providence in originally sanction
ing the institution of marriage. had in
mind an ultimate saving in railway
fares. On the other hand, it is OBJ
served that there is no precedent for
the Norwegian railway authorities
thus to consider a man and his wife
as one and a half. the obvious infer
ence from this new regulation being
that the wife is not the better half.
Is the husband. it is asked, to occupy
n whole seat and the wife be squeezed
into half the space usually allotted to
passengers? Or shall the husband
take his wife on his knee? No ex-
PLANTATION furnishing answers to these
important questions is given by the
Norwegian authorities.