denote: _The Norwegian radicals' method of taking matters into their
hands._]

The Swedish offer being thus refused, the Norwegian Union politics in
1891 took a new turn. The road was already pointed out by the veteran
leader of the Left Side (separatists) JOHAN SVERDRUP; it was indicated
"to take matters into our own hands". The system was founded on the
Norwegian Left Side State-law theory, according to which Norway, as a
Sovereign state, was entitled to its own Minister for Foreign Affairs,
its own diplomatic representatives and consuls, all of which was proved
with much craft by the Constitution of Norway and the Act of Union
between Sweden and Norway. The right to one and all to which Norway, as a
Sovereign power, was entitled, should now be realized, independently and
boldly, without consulting Sweden. By Royal Decree, the Storting having
granted the means, a Norwegian Minister for Foreign Affairs, Norwegian
Diplomatic Representatives and consuls should be appointed without delay
in the Norwegian Council. Thus the lines of the future politics of Norway
were fixed by the Separatists[10:1].

It is obvious, that the notion of the one Kingdom in a Union being able,
of its own accord without consulting the other Kingdom, to alter and
dissolve the bonds of Union, is theoretically inimical to the Union
itself, and in fact shows enormous disloyalty to the other half of the
Union. A _Union_ policy of this sort is, of course, in spirit, completely
revolutionary, and at the outset has no place within the Union.
Nevertheless it has been followed under continued official protestations
of fidelity to the Union--the last speech of this sort was heard a
short time ago, when the well known road was fully marked out, right away
to the object so long hovering in view. This is not the only piece of
duplicity in Norwegian Union policy of whech Sweden has had to complain.

There was a cautious beginning with "their own Consuls"; it was too
venturesome a task to begin the system at once with the question of their
own Minister for Foreign Affairs.

[Sidenote: _The real innecessity of having separate Consuls._]

On the side of Norway it has been claimed that the mercantile interests
of Norway demanded a Consular Service of its own[11:1]. In reality, it is
an indisputable fact, even acknowledged by Norwegians, that no
essentially practical inconvenience has been caused by the system of
having a joint Consular Service. The Circles most