_They closed all roads by which the King would be able to decide the Consular Question in a manner acceptable from a Union point of view; by this means, they forced the King to exercise his veto--and then they cast the responsibility of the revolution on him and Sweden._ This is the basis of the tactics of the Norwegian Revolution. The characteristicness of this is sufficiently evident.
[Sidenote: _The decision in the Storthing._]
The debate on the proposal of the Special Committee in the Storthing was fixed for the day after the National Anniversary, May 17th. National revelries were to precede to encourage and excite. In Christiania, especially, the day was celebrated in such a manner, that there could be no doubt as to what was in the wind. NANSEN used big words about Norway, and big words against Sweden, and in the presence of several thousand persons, a memorial wreath was laid--as on several previous years--on a Colonel KREBS' grave; during the short strife between Sweden and Norway in 1814, the man had succeeded in repulsing a Swedish regiment!
These imposing preparations were followed by the decision of the Storthing. It was first proposed to decide unanimously without any debate. But there were a few members in the Storthing who ventured to protest in words--in actions no one dared to protest.
With a frankness evidently embarrassing to all present, Mr HAGERUP pointed out the two only possible alternatives with reference to the decision; to retract, or to rupture. The latter alternative he evidently found most acceptable, and in Norway's real interest, he warned them as to what the issue might be. He proposed that the decision with respect to these eventualities--which might exceed both the Constitution and the Act of Union--should be deferred till after the new elections, as the Constitution with an almost torturing emphasis insists on caution when a change in the government system is contemplated. Even the rest of the few in the minority made known their different views, and among them the Shipowner JÖRGEN KNUDSEN openly confessed that he saw no forcible reasons for dissolving the joint Consular Service.
But the issue was plain. After Mr HAGERUP'S proposal for an adjournment was voted against with a minority of few the Consular law was passed unanimously.