Morris tribune., 1913-02-21
TPsa Il Ts + \ j. =. y y. r = i +
= NORWAY. i
J. + + j. + !. ]. !. + ]. 4 + J. 81 J.


rrTT r Il s. + + j. y i. y. r + i +
NORWAY. !.
+ J. + j. + + J. + J. j. + + ! i i + j
Says the American Review of Re-
views: "The three Scandinavian
countries in their recent history ex-
emplify three types of monarchy
constitutional, parliamentary and
democratic. About a hundred years
ago Norway was united with Sweden
under a constitution which, accord,
ing to the people of Norway, gave to
the people parliamentary govern
ment. Through single chambered
legislature, elected by universal suf-
frage, the state claimed full control
Of It's own affairs. The Swedish gov
eminent interpreted the constitution
differently, but over the veto of the
! king aristocracy was abolished. The
| people were thoroughly united and
| determined to govern themselves.
| After nearly hundred years of friC-
ton and conflict they set up an indie
! pendent government. They became
/ free people, true democracy, having
equal manhood suffrage and ready to
extend the suffrage to women. There
had been a party in Norway which
favored q republic. These looked to
the United States as a model Steps
were taken to separate the executive
from the legislative. But when the
time for independence came this party
could not agree, upon a constitution.
The experience of England tended to
make monarchy popular and by an
overwhelming majority the Norwe-
| gians elected king; but in choosing
dynasty they abated not q whit their
i democracy. They account themselves
the freest people in the world. The
king knows that he is not to govern.
He fulfiIls the formal function of ap-
| pointing ministry upon the advice
of the leader of the dominant party
in the legislature, and In case Of
doubt he is advised by the speaker
OF the house. He Is not hidden to
suggest changes in the cabinet pro-
gram, but if he changes this 1t is
done with difference and moderation.
If at any time the people Of Norway
should decide to follow the example
of France and choose president il
would become the duty of the king
to render royal aid in making the
change, as did Dom Pedro of Brazil
Such transfer of name and function
should not be called revolution; ii
is simply the modification of de
tail in administration. Sweden, or
the other hand, presents different
monarchy. Here aristocracy remains
There is an upper house in the legis
lature representing interests diverse
from those represented in the lower
house. There is rivalry and confiicI
between the two houses. The kins
takes an active part in cabinet meet
ings. The government Is properl!
described as parliamentary, but not {
democratic monarchy. Denmark still
exhibits another variety of the same
tendencies. Swept along by thu
movements for liberty in 1848 Den
mark adopted a distinctly parliamen
tary government, with the monarch
as nominal head. There was a re
lapse to a constitutional monarchy il
the conflict with Germany in 1866 ant
a contest ensued to regain parliamen
tary control This lasted to the enc
of the century. Not many years agC
, there existed in Denmark rife club
organized for the purpose Of defend
ing parliamentary rights. The tr
umph of parliament was complete Il
! 1901. AS in Sweden, there is reaC
/, tionary house. In both countries tn
. people are rapidly gaining full cor
troll of their government. Legislatio
is pending in the Danish parliamen
for the reform of the upper hous
and the extension of the suffrage t
women. These are but examples of
:, universal tendency. Royalty is M
where secure except as a servant {
democracy"
a j. i. j. + + + i. 4 + :. + 4 j. !. i. :.
e j. DENMARK.
y !. + 4 i. i. 4. 4 !. i. X j. j. !. + i
General Gorte of the regular Dal
7 ish army succeeded in making fIigI