ts of contention arise by the
actions of Norwegian Consuls. For this kind of correspondence, although
dealing with the behaviour of Consuls, is owing to its nature diplomatic
and not consular, and in as much as the matter has a political moment,
the Foreign Minister should continue to keep the management of it; if the
matter should become critical so as to grow into a real international
conflict, he should report it to the King and procure the instructions
necessary for its treatment. It stands to reason that he should not be
debarred from influencing the course of the matter by informing the
Norwegian Consular administration of his opinion as to the steps suitable
to take with regard to the consul Concerned. But the very instructions to
the latter or the disciplinary steps occasioned by the matter belong to
the home consular management and should therefore be issued from the
Norwegian department." We concur in the opinion expressed here and the
demand for an exclusively Norwegian treatment of questions concerning
measures against Norwegian Consuls, appears still more justified in the
cases when the matter is without a political moment, but the question
regards the consul's relation to the Foreign Minister and the legations.
In the last-mentioned respect we want again to refer to the statement of
the Consular Committee (Norwegian edition, pp. 25-26), from which it is
evident that they did not intend any joint treatment of matters relating
to the Consul's disobedience of instructions or omission of duties; nor
was this intention expressed during the negotiations that took place
before the appearance of the Communique. Such a joint treatment that
should precede the treatment from the Norwegian side, can only imply one
of two things. Either it means to be a mere formality only calculated to
delay matters perhaps requiring a speedy decision. Or else it means to be
a real treatment, in which case, the Foreign Minister is intended to get
influence on the settlement of the matter; but in this case it will
signify an encroachment upon a department which, as it maintained, should
be exclusively reserved for a Norwegian authority of State. Besides, it
is self-evident that the Consular administration which may justly be
supposed to be equally interested as the Foreign Minister in Norway not
being compromised by her agents abroad, cannot forbear, when demands for
a Consul's revocation are made on the part of diplomacy, to make the
ma