From Fraser's Magazine. THE CONSTITUTION OF NORWAY.

men apart from their Swedish fellow-subjects, or to determine which of them are losing or are likely to lose their importance.

ALTHOUGH the crowns of Norway and Sweden have been united for upwards of The first place, probably, should be given sixty years, although the interests of the to the difference of language, a difference two countries are almost identical and their which strikes a foreigner as comparatively religion the same, and although no new slight, but which is yet sufficient to place questions have arisen to give increased a great impediment in the way of a thorforce to the still existing causes of the ough amalgamation of the two peoples. separation of feeling, Norwegians and The Norwegian and Swedish languages Swedes are now as far from being fused are, it is true, so nearly akin, that the edu into one nation as at any time during the cated classes of both countries understand long centuries when their armies were fre- one another with little difficulty; but, at quently opposed. The memory of the old the same time, so many peculiarities and conflicts still survives, and the national distinctions exist, and each language has sentiment, stronger perhaps in Norway taken so much a bent of its own, that the than in Sweden, steadily rejects the idea of literature of the one country does not cirany closer union than that which at pres-culate freely in the other. The literature ent exists, and which does not permit either of Sweden, too, rarely penetrates into the nation directly to influence the internal country districts, where the numerous diapolitics of the other. A jealousy of Swe- lects, the relics of centuries of isolation, den, springing from the repeated attempts and bearing more resemblance in their at annexation, and, it may be, intensified archaic forms to the ancient Icelandic than by the earlier prosperity and greater nat- to the modern Swedish, shut off the peasural wealth of the eastern half of the pe-ants from the influence of Swedish literaninsula, still lingers in the minds of the Norwegians, but is at present of little weight in the intercourse between the two countries. This feeling would, however, at once become a living and active force, if a union of the countries, such as was effected between England and Scotland by the Treaty of Union, were proposed. No such proposal could be made at present with any prospect of success, nor, indeed, for many years to come is it likely to be made on the part of the Norwegians, while any proposal emanating from Sweden would be at once rejected. Meanwhile, notwithstanding the abatement of the former open jealousies, and the consequent growth and interchange of friendly feeling, the indirect influence of Sweden, which necessarily resulted from the union of the crowns, has had little effect in modifying the laws, customs, and usages to which the Norwegians are deeply and patrioti-ish language is. It is a common remark cally attached. The reasons for this strongly developed national feeling are not far to seek, and are, at least, as influential now as at any previous period of Norwegian history. It is not so easy to assign their relative position to the different causes which still tend to keep the Norse

ture, and confine them to the perusal of a few Norwegian works, principally on religious subjects. The writings of Swedish authors would, certainly, have been more read and would have produced more effect in gradually obliterating the difference of language, had it not been for the long connection of Norway with Denmark, which till the beginning of this century made the Norwegians almost wholly dependent upon Copenhagen for literature and science. As a first result of this connection, the written language of Norway is identical or almost identical with Danish, and in the next place, when a native literature appeared, as a matter of course, it formed itself to a large extent upon Danish models, though it after a time endeavored to work out a character of its own. The spoken language has always been somewhat nearer to the Swedish than the Dan

that a Norwegian can converse freely with Swedes and Danes, who find difficulty in understanding one another. Norwegian is, however, very much nearer Danish than Swedish, and the continual commercial as well as literary intercourse between the Norwegian towns and Copenhagen

tends to maintain the old relation of the | but also, altogether apart from its merits, languages.

as the work of the patriots who guided Norway safely through the perils of a foreign conquest and an enforced change of allegiance, and who, while unable to vindicate for her people the choice of a sovereign, secured the independence and freedom of Norway by substantial guar

In the next place, the difference in regard to the ownership of land, and the land customs, have much to do in preserv. ing the Norwegian independence. There is no class of wealthy landowners, as in Sweden. The whole land belongs to peasant proprietors, who gain a hard subsist-antees. The failure to form Norway into ence from an ungrateful soil, but who are a separate State is not now regretted, as the strongly attached to the old laws and union of the crowns is felt to add to the usages of Norway, and would not willingly military strength of both countries, and to see them subjected to Swedish influences. be a safeguard against foreign invasion; The towns of Norway are few in number, but, at the same time, the Norwegians and do not occupy so important a position would be slow to abandon a constitution as in Sweden, and thus, while the commer- which is surrounded by such great hiscial classes are more open to foreign toric memories. Under it the internal influence of every kind, their power is affairs of the country have not been neglimited, and the peasants look with suspi-lected, and the separation of the countries cion on novelties which have gained the support of the towns. The great mass of the peasant proprietors live quiet and uneventful lives, with little intercourse with the outer world, and feel but slight interest in the questions which agitate more densely populated and wealthier countries. They are not easily induced to change the customs under which they have lived, and with the advantages of which they are satisfied. A union with Sweden would launch them on a sea of unknown changes, and the benefits from a closer union are not of a kind to appeal to their imagination, while | Denmark, under which, they thought, they the dangers to which their cherished customs would be exposed are very real and apparent to their eyes.

has not, as yet, exposed either Sweden or Norway to any danger from abroad. It is not, then, surprising that the attachment of the Norwegians to their constitution has only deepened with time, and that in this attachment should be found one of the most formidable obstacles to any amalgamation of Norway and Sweden.

The acquisition of Norway was long an object of ambition to the warlike kings of Sweden. Repeated invasions were repelled by the valor of the Norwegians, who preferred the rule of the kings of

had more security for the enjoyment of their ancient customs. Charles XII. met his death while prosecuting the siege of All these causes co-operate to maintain the border fortress of Frederickshall; and the separation and internal independence though the invasion of Norway was then of Norway. Some of them will, undoubt- abandoned by Sweden, it was rather beedly, grow weaker in time, but only very cause the Swedish statesmen were anxious slowly, while in the mean time they have to secure for their country a period of fostered the growth of a strong national repose, than because they had relinquished sentiment, which shows itself in nothing the hope of conquest. Gustavus IV., more than in the attachment of the people smarting under the loss of Finland, medįto the constitution. This attachment is, tated the conquest of Norway, but his in part, the outcome of the national pecu- ambitious dreams were cut short by his liarities, but it is founded principally on own enforced abdication. The dangers to the prominence which the constitution which Norway was exposed were, howholds in the most eventful epoch of the ever, only postponed. In 1812, when the modern history of Norway. It is warmly Grand Alliance was being formed, Sweden, regarded not merely as giving a well-con- which had unwillingly entered into the sidered and practically efficient form of Continental system of Napoleon, and had government, under which the interests of evaded as much as possible its obligations the country have been fairly attended to, to exclude British manufactures from

gency. All the resources of France were not sufficient to beat back the tide of invasion of her own provinces, and Napoleon could spare no troops to protect a country which had furnished so many sailors to man his fleets. England was hampered by the Treaty of Orebro, and seeing much of advantage in the union of the Scandinavian peninsula, was obliged, though half regretfully, to recommend submission. The other European powers were hostile or indifferent. Resistance was, nevertheless, resolved on. Prince Christian Frederick,

Swedish ports, with the result of incurring | ously endangered. Everything depended the suspicion of Napoleon, whose troops on their own resolution, for they could look invaded Pomerania, then belonging to to no foreign power for help in this emerthe Swedish crown, was easily persuaded to ally itself with Russia. Among the obligations and counter obligations undertaken by the contracting parties, the two most important were those by which on the one hand the Swedish government undertook to furnish an army, of thirty thousand men to co-operate with the Russian forces against the French in the north of Germany, and on the other hand Russia guaranteed to Sweden the enforced cession of Norway by Denmark, the faithful ally of France, on the conclusion of the war. The terms of the treaty in which this agree- the heir presumptive to the Danish crown, ment was embodied, were secretly com- and governor-general of Norway, was municated to the British government, adopted as their sovereign, and was enthuwhich, eager for the downfall of Napoleon, siastically received by the peasants, all deand for the union of the nations of Europe termined to fight for their independence, against him, approved of them. Negotia- on his journey through the country to tions were opened between the English Throndhjem. A convention of represenand Swedish governments, and ultimately tatives from all parts of the country was the Treaty of Orebro was signed on July held at Eidswold, near the southern end of 12, 1812, by which England agreed not to the beautiful Lake Miosen, where measoppose the conquest of Norway, and prom-ures for the national defence were conised the assistance of her fleet if required, but at the same time stipulated that the rights and privileges of the Norwegian people should be respected. In the following year Bernadotte, who had been Prince Christian was, however, not desadopted by Charles XIII. as his succes- tined to retain the crown of Norway. A sor, invaded Holstein at the head of a naval defeat was suffered by the NorweSwedish army; and the Danes, being un-gians off the Hualorn Islands, and the able to resist his advance, and hopeless of crown prince of Sweden advanced rapidly assistance from Napoleon, were obliged to towards Christiania at the head of twenty accede to the conditions which he dictated, thousand Swedes, who, in spite of a galand which were embodied in the Treaty of lant resistance, drove back the troops asKiel. By this treaty, which was signed sembled by Prince Christian and forced on January 14 and February 8, 1814, Nor- the passage of the Glommen. Bernadotte way was ceded to Sweden, and the king of was about to attack the main body of the Denmark in a proclamation addressed to Norwegian army at Moss, when Prince his Norwegian subjects released them from Christian, seeing the hopelessness of the their allegiance and advised them to acqui- struggle, agreed to resign his pretensions esce in the new order of things. The before the fortune of war had put it beancient Norse spirit, however, was not yond his power to stipulate for conditions ready tamely to submit to a change of mas- advantageous to the people whose cause ters, for which the consent of the nation he had adopted. The courage of the Norhad not been asked; the more so that, wegians had not been displayed in vain ; notwithstanding the engagements of the and no decisive battle having been fought, Swedish king to respect their rights and. they were enabled to treat for better terms privileges, the Norwegian people felt that than they might have ventured to ask if their liberty and independence were seri- their army had been beaten and dispersed.

certed, and a constitution for the country prepared. The latter was completed in four days, and was passed on May 17, 1814.

By the Convention of Moss (August 14, | time, however, the new order of things 1814) the struggle was brought to an end, out at the same time substantial guarantees were obtained for the maintenance of the independence of Norway. The withdrawal of Prince Christian left the Norwegians no option but to accept Charles XIII. as their sovereign, though it was stipulated that the election should be made by an extraordinary Storthing to be forthwith held. On the other hand, the crown prince, on behalf of the king of Sweden, accepted the constitution of Eidswold, subject to such alterations as the union of the crowns might render necessary. Commissioners were appointed to conduct the ensuing negotiations, and an extraordinary Storthing was summoned to ratify the changes in the constitution, and to confirm the stipulations of the Convention of Moss.

This Storthing met at Christiania on October 7, 1814, and on the 20th of the same month agreed, not without some dissentient voices, to the union of the two countries under one king, and then proceeded to take into consideration the changes in the constitution thus rendered necessary. The alterations proposed by the royal commissioners were discussed by the Storthing, and a new constitution, little differing from that of Eidswold, was prepared, and on November 4, 1814, declared to be substituted in its place. This constitution was confirmed by the crown prince in the name of Charles XIII., and, with the other modifications which have from time to time been made on it, forms the Grundlov, or fundamental law, of the kingdom of Norway. Two other documents, however, occupy an important position in determining the constitution of the country. The first is the Swedish Order of Succession, which the Grundlov adopts as regulating the succession to the Norwegian crown, and by entailing the crown on the same order of heirs, materially lessens the risk of a disputed succession. The second is the Rigsact, to which the king, the Swedish Rigsdag, and the Norwegian Storthing were parties, and which settles the constitutional relation of the two countries, and defines the limits within which the respective governments must keep in dealing with questions affecting either or both countries. The new constitution was not accepted without much heart-burning and irritation, especially in the country districts, where the peasants were passionately attached to their country, and resented even the appearance of subjection to Sweden. In

was accepted, and the peasants perceived that, while they had lost the shadow of independence, they had gained a substantial freedom from all control on the part of their Swedish neighbors; and that, while less exposed to the danger of war than formerly, their affairs were as much as, perhaps more than, at any former time under their own guidance, and that the moulding of the future of their country lay in their own hands. This has reconciled them to the present dynasty, but at the same time, has made them thoroughly opposed to any change in the constitution which could by possibility lead to an increase of Swedish influence in the disposal of Norwegian questions, and has kept them jealously alive to the action of the crown.

Norway is declared by the Grundlov to be a free, independent, and indivisible kingdom, united with Sweden under one king, whose authority is defined, and whose power is limited by the constitution. The crown is hereditary in the family of Bernadotte, who was elected crown prince of Sweden in 1810, with a right of succession to the throne on the death of the childless Charles XIII. The order of succession is fixed by the SuccessionsOrdning, which was enacted by the king and the four Swedish houses of parlia ment at an extraordinary Rigsdag at Orebro on September 26, 1810, and which, as already stated, is incorporated in the Norwegian constitution. The succession to the throne of Norway is entailed on the eldest son of Bernadotte and his male descendants, excluding not merely females, but mails claiming through females; and on their extinction, the other sons of Bernadotte and their male descendants are entitled to succeed. The throne may become vacant not only through the death of all the male representatives of the king, Charles John, but also through the existing princes having forfeited their right to succeed. This may happen in various ways. In the first place, any prince who does not profess the Protestant faith according to the Confession of Augsburg and the Resolution of the Upsala Assembly of 1593, is excluded from the right of succession. Princes are not permitted to marry except with consent of the king, who cannot give his consent to their marriage with a Swedish subject, or with a foreigner not of a royal house. The king may, however, consent to their marrying a princess of the royal house of Sweden who is not related within the forbidden