Countersignature implied responsibility for the King's decisions, but in this case the government could not take that responsibility. It was prescribed in the Constitution Sec. 31 for all commands issued by the King (except affairs relating to military orders). But this conclusion was not a regular rule for the members of the Cabinet; it was a prescription for the forms to be observed in order to give a command legal validity. Occasions might therefore occur when it was not only right, but also a duty to refuse countersignature. The Section of the Cabinet Council had appealed to the Justice-Departement for enlightenment on the subject, and they knew that there had been several occasions when the Norwegian side had maintained the same opinions as those now presented. The Departement now comes to the same conclusion as in 1847 when it discussed the question in another agreement namely in a Resolution on the intended proposal for a new Act of Union; in this there is a reference to the Norwegian conception that there is nothing to prevent a member of the Council from refusing countersignature and resigning his office. This Resolution is accepted by the Government then in office: Lovenskiold, Krog, Sibbern, Schmidt, Pettersen, Herm. Foss and Fr. Stang and by the members then forming the Section of the Cabinet Council, Due, J. H. Vogt and Fleischer. The Section of the Cabinet Council finally decided that as a refusal to sanction would manifestly not be only injurious to the Kingdom, but also a denial of its Self-dependence, it had become a necessity to refuse countersignature, in order to avoid being a party in the matter. The Norwegian who did countersign would from that moment lose all national rights. After which the letters of resignation from the Norwegian Government, and from the Section of the Cabinet Council were delivered and read in the presence of the King. Respecting this matter, the customary protocol has been drawn up. Kristiania 30:th May 1905. _J. Lovland._ _E. Hagerup Bull._ _Harald Bothner._ 20. The King's telegraphic protest against the declarations of the Norwegian Government. Dated Stockholm, May 29, 1905. Stockholm, May 29. On account of what the Norwegian Government has declared--not only in writing in their resignations, but also verbally in the Cabinet Council of May 27 after my rejection of the Consular service law--I must declare that I, most decidedly, protest against the comments made there on Me and my method of action. I adhere to everything I have stated to the assembled Cabinet Council as to my constitutional right. I beg the Premie minister to give publicity to this as soon as possible. _Oscar._ 21. The Norwegian Cabinet Minister's notification to the King that they resigned their posts. Dated Christiania, Juni 6, 1905.