ions by exceeding the terms of the
Communique[41:1]. It has evidently been privately expressed by the
negotiating party in Norway, during the latter stage of the negotiations,
and it was indirectly referred to by Prime Minister HAGERUP when he
announced in the Storthing, that the negotiations were broken off. The
Swedish government contradicted it, however, in their last letter, and
offered to modify their proposition if it were proved that it exceeded
the terms of the Communique. But the Norwegian government failed to
produce the proofs, they preferring to cut off negotiations.

What the Norwegians point out over and over again is the provision of the
Communique that the Consuls of each Kingdom shall be under the authority
of the country to which they belong, which matter the country concerned
shall decide. Against this, it has been mentioned, is opposed the Swedish
government's evident plans to arrange a "hierarchal" relationship between
the Foreign Minister and the Norwegian Consuls. This decision, in itself,
undoubtedly seems to speak for the Norwegian notion of the affair. But an
honest method of interpretation tries to see individual particles in the
light of their relation to the whole matter.

Now, on the contents of the identical laws, the Communique confirms among
other things that they shall "give guarantee that the Consuls do not
exceed the proper limits of their occupation." What guarantee? The
Norwegian negotiators, who scarcely paid any attention to this provision
in their proposition, are said to have maintained verbally, that the best
guarantee was the control exercised over the Consuls by the Norwegian
Consular Office. But to this the Swedish government may justly object:
"that was not the kind of guarantee intended by the Communique, as this
had nothing to do with the internal relations between the Norwegian
consuls and the Norwegian Consular service. The guarantee which the
Communique mentions, can refer to nothing but the control to be exercised
by the Foreign Minister and Ambassadors over the Consuls".

If this interpretation is acknowledged as correct--and it is difficult
to find any other--it is plain that the presupposition cited by the
Norwegians only referred to _normal_ conditions and that it did not
exclude in exceptional cases--as for instance, when Consular affairs
were in any way connected with the Diplomatic Office--a hierarchal
relationship between the Foreign Minister and the Consuls.