On the part of the Swedish government, no opinion on the question has yet been published. Buth it may nevertheless, with great certainty, be assumed _that the Swedish negotiators for the identical laws really, among other matters, intended to bind Norway not to take the question of foreign administration "into her own hands_." The great fear of such a contingency, shown by the Norwegian Radicals, is sufficient proof of this, for, as a rule, Norwegian politicians keep themselves pretty well informed on matters of negotiation, even when they are of a more confidential nature. Also, more or less direct references have been made by the Norwegian government, that the interpretation of the Communique by the Swedish government differed from its own[27:1]. This supposition is vindicated by the political situation throughout. It is plain that to the Swedish government the compensation demanded for concessions in the Consular question, was the guarantee that the consequences of having a Norwegian Consular Service would not pave the way for a Norwegian Foreign Office. It was therefore first necessary to demand of Norway implicit loyalty with reference to the future solving of the Foreign Minister question. The Swedish delegates have therefore evidently tried to exact from Norway, as an expression of implicit loyalty, a contract not to seek to alter the Status quo with respect to the Foreign administration[27:2], without an agreement with Sweden. How is it possible then, that the Norwegian government in the Storthing could interpret the Communique as it did? As long as the details in the protocol of negotiations are not known, it is impossible to make any definite assertions. The Norwegian government may possibly have felt assured that the Communique did not intend a direct refusal to Norway of its assumed legal right to its own Minister for Foreign affairs--that demand could scarcely be expected to emanate from Sweden--and passed over the Swedish delegates' plain intention to bind Norway to the _execution_ of that right. But as this question has manifestly been an object of protracted debates, the Norwegian government cannot possibly have remained in ignorance of the Swedish delegates' intentions with regard to the wording of the Communique on that point, and the Norwegian governments attitude in the matter, is, to say the least, rather strange, especially in the light of the apparently somewhat undiplomatic War Minister STANG'S open declaration in the Storthing, that according to his idea of the matter, _the decisions in respect to the identical laws were scarcely in accordance with Mr_ BLEHR'S _interpretation of the Communique_.