d cause for the plans then
already existing in Norway, plans which had probably been laid years ago.

Now in what does the truth of their accusations lie?

[Sidenote: _The responsibility of breaking off the negotiations._]

The accusations implied in the mildest form that the attitude of the
Swedish government had caused the break down in the negotiations. To this
it must be first pointed out, that the side which first formulated its
demands as an ultimatum formally bears the responsibility. Formally,
therfore, the Norwegian government is unquestionably the responsible
party, so much the more so, that not even after the Norwegian Ultimatum,
did the Swedish government maintain its standpoint as being absolutely
inflexible. It must also be observed that the first Norwegian proposition
in May 1904, in fact, propounded the essentials contained in the
Ultimatum. It was certainly held to be only the grounds for further
negotiations, but it was proclaimed afterwards on the Norwegian side,
that the Norwegian Cabinet had found it possible that divergencies in the
form and contents of the law, would be limited to a very slight number of
points of minor importance.

The formal responsibility for the breaking off of the negotiations may
now, on the whole, be considered of slight importance. It is interesting
only on the grounds that it illustrates the Norwegian method of
negotiating, which all but commences with the ultimatum, for it explains
to a great extent the difficulties of the opposite party in gaining their
lawful rights.

The accusations on the Norwegian side, of course, imply, that the Swedish
government, in making unreasonable conditions, had practically caused the
breaking off of the negotiations, and even wished to bring about that
result. As regards the former, an impartial examination of the Swedish
final proposal is the best refutation. And as regards the latter, it may
assuredly be affirmed, that there was no want of good will, on the part
of Sweden, to come to a good understanding on the point, the last letter
on the question written by Sweden is a sufficient proof of this. But the
government could not reasonably be expected to go further in granting
concessions.

It was indisputably clear to the Norwegian government, that they could
not make greater concessions. During the proceeding of the negotiations
it had become intimately acquainted with the opinions in Norwegian
political circles, and it knew that if