law, and submitted it to the people; but at the election, August 7, the democratic majority disappeared, and a majority of over 110,000 appeared against the law. Among the prominent names in the state's political history are the following: Geo. E. Badger, secretary of the navy under Harrison, and whig United States senator 1846-55, Thomas Bragg, democratic governor 1855-9, United States seuator 1859-61, and attorney general of the confederate states (see CONFEDERATE STATES); John Branch, democratic governor 1817-20, United States senator 1823-9, secretary of the navy under Jackson, representative in congress 1831-3, and candidate for governor in 1838; Thos. L. Clingman, representative in congress (whig) 1843-5 and 1847-51, (democrat) 1851-8, United States senator 1858–61, and brigadier general in the confederate army; James C. Dobbin, democratic congressman 1845-7, and secretary of the navy under Pierce; Alfred Dockery, whig congressman 1845-7 and 1851-3, and candidate for governor in 1854; Wm. A. Graham (see his name); Nathaniel Macon, democratic congressman 1791-1815, United States senator 181528, and speaker of the house 1801-6, a most sincere, consistent and incorruptible politician; W. P. Mangum (see his name); John Pool, whig candidate for governor in 1860, and republican United States senator 1868-75; Matt. W. Ransom, major general in the confederate army, and democratic United States senator 1872-89; Kenneth Rayner, whig congressman 1839-45, one of the "American" leaders 1855-8, and solicitor of the treasury under Hayes and Garfield; Thomas Ruffin, democratic congressman 1853-61, killed in the confederate army; Thomas Settle, president of the republican national convention in 1872, and republican candidate for governor in 1876; Zebulon B. Vance, whig (or opposition) congressman 1858-61, colonel in the confederate army, governor 1863-5 and 1877-9, and democratic United States senator 1870–72 (not admitted) and 1879-85; and Hugh, Williamson, federalist congressman 1790-93. (See MECKLENBURGH DECLARATION, TENNESSEE, SECESSION, BORDER STATES, RECONSTRUCTION.). - See 2 Poore's Federal and State Constitutions; 10 John Locke's Works (Carolina constitution); Lawson's History of Carolina (to 1714); Hawks' History of North Carolina (to 1729); authorities under MECKLENBURGH DECLARATION; 1 Byrd's History of the Dividing Line Between Virginia and North Carolina; Williamson's History of North Carolina (to 1812); Martin's History of North Carolina (to 1829); Jones' Memorials of North Carolina (1838); Foote's Sketches of North Carolina (1853); T. L. Clingman's Speeches and Addresses; Bennet's Chronology of North Carolina (1858); and authorities under articles referred to. ALEXANDER JOHNSTON. NORTHWEST BOUNDARY (IN U. S. HISTORY). I. CLAIMS. The territory bounded north by latitude 50° 40', east by the Rocky mountains, south by latitude 42° (the northern boundary of California), and west by the Pacific ocean, has been claimed at various times, and to varying extents, by Russia, Spain, Great Britain, and the United States. As the claims overlapped and interfered with one another, they may be first stated. (For the northeast boundary, see MAINE.) - 1. The claim of Russia rested mainly on occupation by fur traders, and its southern boundary was at first undefined. April 5-17, 1824, a treaty was arranged between the United States and Russia, which was ratified by the former Jan. 11. 1825. By its third article no settlements were to be made under the authority of the United States north of latitude 54° 40', nor any Russian settlements south of that line. Feb. 28, 1825, by a treaty between Russia and Great Britain, the same parallel was made a part of the boundary between their respective settlements. By these two treaties Russia at once secured her southern boundary, and withdrew from the imbroglio.-2. The claim of Spain, in some respects the best of all, rested in discovery, backed by occupation. The discovery rested in the voyages of Cabrillo and Ferrelo in 1543, to latitude 43°; of Juan de Fuca in 1592 to parallel 49°, and the strait which bears his name; of Vizcaino in 1603, to latitude 43°; of Perez in 1774, to latitude 54°; of Heceta in 1775, to latitude 48°, discovering, but not entering, the river St. Roque (now the Columbia); and of a few minor voyages as far north as latitude 59°. Occupation had been begun as early as 1535, by a land expedition under Fernando Cortez, and Jesuit settlements were gradually pushed further north, though they never passed latitude 42°. Nevertheless, Spain asserted exclusive control of the coast beyond latitude 42°. In May and June, 1789, Spanish armed vessels seized several British vessels in Nootka sound, and war was only averted by the Nootka sound convention, or treaty of the Escurial, Oct. 28, 1790, by which British trading buildings in Nootka sound were to be restored, the right of trade was to be secured to both parties, but neither was to land on coasts already occupied by the other. In 1803, by the treaty ceding Louisiana (see ANNEXATIONS, I.), the claim of France, which was really the claim of Spain, to an indefinite territory on the Pacific, was transferred to the United States; and by the Florida treaty of 1819-22 (see ANNEXATIONS, II.), Spain fixed latitude 42° as the Pacific portion of the boundary line between her American territory and the United States. Spain thus retired from the field, leaving but two contestants for the disputed territory, Great Britain and the United States.-3. Great Britain had little or no claim by discovery. Drake had seen the coast in 1580; Cook had examined it slightly in 1778; and Vancouver much more thoroughly in 1793: but all these were rather rediscoverers than discoverers. Occupation was actually begun in 1788 by Meares, an English lieutenant; but he was under the Portuguese flag at the time, with letter of marque against British vessels who should molest him, so that his occupation could hardly weigh heavily for Great Britain. In 1793, 1806 and 1811 enterprising fur traders, in private employ, pushed into the Oregon country, and established trading posts there; but there was no attempt at permanent settlement south of latitude 49°. - 4. The claim of the United States deduced from Spain is at least doubtful. The claim by discov ery rests on two grounds, the voyage of Gray, and the expedition of Lewis and Clarke. In 1792 Capt. Gray, of Boston, entered the river St. Roque, at which Heceta had only guessed, and changed its name to the Columbia river, after the name of his vessel. In 1805-6 Lewis and Clarke, under orders from President Jefferson, crossed the Rocky mountains, struck the southern head waters of the Columbia, floated down that river to its mouth, and explored very much of the Oregon country. On the strength of Gray's discovery the United States claimed all of the country drained by the Columbia; but so extensive a claim is hardly tenable in international law. Lewis and Clarke's expedition was more important: it was made under government authority, and it covered most of the territory south of latitude 49°; while the British fur traders were not in public employ, and their explorations were north of latitude 49°. On the whole, if discovery alone were in question, latitude 49°, as finally fixed, would seem to be equitable: south of it the United States had officially explored the territory; and north of it Great Britain had done so, though not officially. In 1811 John Jacob Astor, of New York, established a trading post at the mouth of the Columbia, and named it Astoria; but during the war of 1812 it was captured by the British, and named Fort George. In 1818 it was restored to the United States government, but its private owner abandoned it. At tempts in 1822 and 1827 to organize American fur companies for operating in the Oregon country were unsuccessful, owing to the powerful rivalry of well-established British companies; but they led the way to a more legitimate occupation, by immigration, in which Great Britain could not compete. This began in 1832, and after 1838 no autumn passed without an increasing supply of permanent settlers across the Rocky mountains. In 1845 the American population was nearly 3,000, and there was no probability of any decrease in the increase for the future. Here, after all, lay the true ground of the American claim in legitimate and permanent settlements; and, as these filled the space covered by Lewis and Clarke's explorations, the two together make a valid claim up to latitude 49°. II. SETTLEMENT. The definitive treaty of peace of Sept. 3, 1783, after defining the northeastern boundary to the St. Lawrence river (see MAINE), continued the northern boundary between the United States and British America up through the middle of the St. Lawrence river and the great lakes to Long lake, on the northern coast of Lake Superior; thence northwesterly by the water commu nications through Rainy lake to the lake of the Woods; and thence to the river Mississippi, which was then the boundary between the United States and Spanish America. The cession of Louisiana to the United States in 1803 made necessary a definition of the northern boundary between the new cession and British America; and this was settled by the second article of the convention of Oct. 20, 1818, which fixed latitude 49° as the boundary from its intersection with the lake of the Woods to the Stony [Rocky] mountains. West of the Rocky mountains the whole territory was to be open, for ten years, to the vessels, citizens and subjects of both powers, without prejudice to the claims of either. By the convention of Aug. 6, 1827 (ratified by the United States, April 2, 1828), the joint occupation of the Oregon country by Great Britain and the United States was continued indefinitely, with the provision that either party might aunul and abrogate it, on giving twelve months' notice to the other. In both these negotiations the American negotiators laid formal claim to the whole territory drained by the Columbia, included generally between parallels 42° and 52° of latitude; but they showed a willingness to compromise on latitude 49° to the Pacific. The British negotiators, on the other hand, seem to have been willing to accept latitude 49° to its intersection with the Columbia; but thence to the Pacific they insisted on the Columbia itself as a boundary, thus adding to British America nearly the whole of the present territory of Washington. In such a conflict of claims, the only possible line of action was to continue the joint occupation until one party should be able to assert an exclusive right to some part of it.— As American immigration increased, the certain perils of a joint occupation increased with it. The magistrates of neither country could have or exercise jurisdiction over the citizens of the other; and difficulties between parties of different nationalities could therefore have no forum for settlement. In 1838 propositions to organize some system of justice in the Oregon country began to be offered in congress. At first these were only to imitate the British system of erecting forts and providing magistrates for the trial of offenses, without any design to terminate the joint occupation; but the settlement of the northeastern boundary question in 1842 had an unfortunate effect on the discussion of the true northwestern boundary. There was considerable dissatisfaction in both countries over the result of the treaty of 1842, and a determination to insist on their respective claims in Oregon. In the United States this feeling took two distinct forms. 1. The treaty by which Russia had agreed to settle no farther south than latitude 54° 40' seems to have produced a belief that this line was the proper boundary. Forgetting that the treaty could bind only the parties to it, and that Great Britain could appeal to a precisely similar contemporary treaty with Russia, there were many in the United States who ་ were willing to insist on the Russian boundary dent to give the notice when in his judgment even at the price of a war with Great Britain. the proper time had come; that is, when the UnitThis feeling was popularly summed up as "fifty-ed States should be ready for war. This the four-forty-or-fight." 2. The "Monroe doctrine" other side answered by pressing bills for the inwas strongly appealed to, in order to sustain the crease of the navy. To strengthen the hands view that to yield any part of the Pacific coast of the anti-war democrats and whigs, the presto Great Britain would be to consent to the ident sent to congress, Feb. 7, 1846, the corresformation of a European colony on this conti- pondence between the two governments since nent, and that too, as our nearest neighbor. Of December. From this it appeared that Great this feeling Douglas was the ablest exponent. Britain was arming; that the United States had - In this state of public feeling, the democratic asked for the reasons of her preparations; and national convention of 1844 declared for the "re- that she had frankly acknowledged that she was -occupation of Oregon," on the ground that our incidentally preparing for an American war. — In title to the whole of it was clear and unquestion- March, after the house had passed the directory able. It was, to be sure, coupled with a demand resolution for notice, a friend of the president in for the "reannexation of Texas" (see ANNEXA- the senate advised a compromise on latitude 49° TIONS, III.); but it met a popular feeling in the as the boundary. He declined to calm the resultnorth and west which it was difficult to resist. ing excitement by acknowledging the president Democratic success in 1844, and the decided tone as his authority. April 16 the senate passed a of President Polk's inaugural in 1845, made the discretionary resolution for notice; and two days Oregon question prominent from the beginning later the house amended it by authorizing and of his administration. Under the preceding requesting" the president to give notice. April 23 (Tyler's) administration, the secretary of state, both houses agreed to a new resolution, which, Calhoun, had been conducting a negotiation on while varying the form of the senate resolution, the Oregon question with the British minister, retained its essence, that the president be “authorPakenham, from July, 1844, until January, 1845. ized" to give the twelve months' notice, and that Calhoun had offered to take latitude 49 as the negotiations should continue. - June 6, 1846, the boundary; Pakenham had offered, in return, the British ambassador offered to accept latitude 49° Columbia river from latitude 49° to the Pacific, as the boundary to the channel between Vancouand when this was declined had proposed an arbi- ver's island and the mainland, thence down the tration, which Calhoun refused. This refusal, middle of the channel and the strait of Fuca to and the declaration of the inaugural that our the Pacific, with free navigation, to both parties, title to the whole of Oregon" was indisputable, of the channel and the Columbia. Even this did and that our settlers there must be protected, not wholly relieve the president, for he had no raised the war feeling high in Great Britain. mind to array himself against the "fifty-fourThis seems to have had an influence on the presi- forty" idea. He therefore endeavored to throw dent. In July, 1845, his secretary of state, Bu- the responsibility upon the whig senate by rechanan, again proposed latitude 49° as a bound- questing its advice on the acceptance of the conary, which was again refused; but the rumor of vention-a process unused since Washington's the offer evoked such a storm that the secretary time. It must be recorded to the credit of the withdrew the offer. The meeting of congress in whigs, who were not ignorant of his purpose, that December, 1845, was the signal for a renewal of they advised the ratification of the convention, the question. Resolutions were introduced in June 12. Ratifications were exchanged at Lonboth houses that the "whole of Oregon" be- don, July 17, 1846, and the Oregon question, in longed to the United States, and that there was its main features, was settled finally. There was no power in the president and senate to alienate still, however, one minor point, which was not by treaty any part of the soil of the United States. settled until 1872. The commissioners appointed Senators Allen, of Ohio, and Hannegan, of Indi- to run the boundary could not agree on the true ana, were the most persistent champions of these water channel through the middle of which it was measures. On the contrary, the opposition, Cal- to run. The British insisted on the Rosario straits; houn being its ablest speaker, held that, since the Americans on the canal de Haro. By the immigration to Oregon could only come from the thirty-fourth article of the treaty of Washington, United States, it was wiser to maintain the joint in 1871, it was agreed to submit the question occupation until the natural process of crowding finally to the emperor of Germany as arbitrator. out should compel Great Britain to withdraw. In the following year the arbitrator decided in The former then began to press a resolution direct- favor of the canal de Haro.-See 8 Stat. at Large, ing the president to give Great Britain the twelve 80, 248, 360, 9 ib., 869, and 17 ib., 863 (for treaties months' notice to terminate the joint occupation. of Sept. 3, 1783, Oct. 20, 1818, Aug. 6. 1827, June The latter united in holding, 1, that as the notice 15, 1846, and May 8, 1871, respectively); authoriwas part of a treaty, the treaty power alone could ties under OREGON; 3 von Holst's United States, give it; 2, that the notice was in the direct line 161, 216, 273; 15, 16 Benton's Debates of Congress of war with Great Britain, for which the coun- (see index); Statesman's Manual (Polk's Messages); try was not ready; and 3, that in any event Greenhow's Northwest Coast, 1840, and History of the resolution should only authorize the presi- | Oregon and California, 1845 (the authorities cited in the foot notes form a bibliography up to date); Irving's Astoria, and Bonneville's Expedition; Reports of Lewis and Clarke, and Fremont; Rush's Residence at the Court of London (London ed. of 1872), 372; 1 Dix's Speeches and Addresses, 1 (the best statement of the American claims); Edin burgh Review, July, 1845 (probably the fairest summary); 2 N. W. Senior's Essays; Dunn's Oregon Territory; Falconer's Oregon Question; Robertson's Oregon: Our Right and Title; T. Twiss' Oregon Question Examined; Wallace's Oregon Question Determined; 2 Benton's Thirty Years' View, 660; 4 Calhoun's Works, 260; 2 Webster's Works, 322; 5 ib., 60; 2 Webster's Private Correspondence, 215, 230; 1 Coleman's Life of Crittenden, 236; Cutts' Constitutional and Party Questions, 61. ALEXANDER JOHNSTON. NORWAY. One of the two states forming the Scandinavian peninsula, and united under the sceptre of the same king, with Sweden. The area of Norway, a small part of which is cultivated, is about 317,000 square kilometres, and its population, according to the census of 1875, the last taken, was 1,806,900. Former censuses give the population as follows: 1769, 723,141 inhabitants; 1801, 883,038; 1815, 885,431; 1825, 1,051,318; 1835, 1,194,827; 1845, 1,328,471; 1855, 1,490,047; 1865, 1,701,756 inhabitants. At the end of 1879 the population was estimated at 1,916,000.- Norway has nothing in common with Sweden except its Scandinavian origin, its religion (Lutheran), the king and foreign representation. Its constitution dates from 1814, the time of its union with Sweden, and presents many remarkable peculiarities. The Norwegian parliament is called the storthing, and is divided for legislative affairs properly so called, into two chambers, the odels thing and the lagthing. The members of the storthing are composed of representatives from the cities and representatives from the country, both elected for three years. To be eligible a person must enjoy a good reputation, be an elector, be thirty years of age, inhabit the district in which he is elected, and have lived at least ten years in Norway. The members of the council of state, the employés of the administration, and the officials of the court, are not eligible. To be an elector a man must be twenty-five years old, have lived at least five years in Norway, have taken the oath of fidelity to the constitution, enjoy a good reputation, and must have one of the following qualifications: 1, he must be or have been an official; 2, possess lands either as proprietor, or as farmer with a lease of more than five years; 3, be a burger in a commercial city so called, or possess in a seaport town real property worth at least $165; 4, have been registered as a tax payer for five years in the districts of the north of the kingdom, called the Finnish steppes, inhabited principally by Laplanders. There are two degrees in the elections. In the country 100 primary electors choose one secondary elector; the secondary electors assemble in the chief towns of the district, and choose from their own number one member out of every ten, but not more than four, as deputies. In the cities there is one secondary elector for every fifty primary electors, and in the assembly of the former one member is elected out of four, but not more than four in all. The depu ties, whose number was fixed at 111 by the law of Nov. 26, 1859 (seventy-four for the rural districts and thirty-seven for the commercial cities so called), receive a certain allowance per day while sojourning at the seat of parliament, and traveling expenses; they formerly assembled every three years at Christiania, but by a modification of the constitution adopted in April, 1869, it was resolved to hold annual meetings. It can not remain in session more than three months without the authorization of the king. The king may also call the storthing together in extraordinary session, but he can not dissolve it and have new deputies chosen. Among those elected there are always many communal functionaries (fifty to sixty), and notably pastors, teachers and choir leaders. The prerogatives of the storthing are, to make and repeal laws, to vote the budget, to watch over the public finances, to examine the acts of the government, and to try crimes against the state. The king and the viceroy (prince royal) are not subject to this political jurisdiction. The deputies share with the government the initiative in legislation. When the storthing comes together in assembly, it elects a fourth of its members to form the lagthing (upper chamber); the rest constitute the odelsthing, and each chamber meets separately. Bills are presented to the odelsthing; those which are passed by it are sent to the lagthing, which accepts or rejects them. In the latter case, the bill comes back with the exceptions to it, which are examined by the odelsthing. If each chamber persists twice in its opinion, they come together, and the storthing votes as a single assembly. In the lagthing the members of the high court of justice are chosen. The laws passed are subject to the sanction of the king. This sanction can be refused twice. When passed the third time by the storthing, the law has no further need of sanction. The king has then only a suspensive reto. This was the way, in 1821, that the institution of nobility was abolished in Norway. The king has nevertheless rather extensive power, and the ministers are responsible only if they have not noted their protest on the record. With this exception they are free to affix their countersign; or, to speak more exactly, the ministers are responsible only for their propositions. The king can appoint a viceroy or a lieutenant; the prince royal only can be viceroy, and he is then obliged to reside inNorway nine months out of the twelve. — The "Norwegian government" is composed of two ministers and at least seven councilors of state, appointed by the king from among Norwegians. One of the ministers and two councilors of state are always with the king in Sweden, and the five others, presided over by the viceroy or the - lieutenant of the king, (there has been none since | obliged to serve five years in the line-two in the 1830), are occupied with affairs of the interior. The king can decide nothing without having taken the advice of the council of state, or of the part of the Norwegian government which has its seat at Christiania. He is general-in-chief of all the land and naval forces, but he can not employ the army or the navy for a war of aggression without the consent of parliament; not even in favor of Sweden, which is considered as a foreign country by Norway. Still, the king "can make treaties, declare war, levy troops," but we believe that these royal rights exist more upon paper than in fact. The king, however, enjoys the plenitude of executive power. There are seven ministerial departments, each one directed by a councilor of state. The departments are as follows: 1, of worship and education; 2, of justice and police; 3, of the interior; 4, of finance and customs; 5, of the army; 6, of the navy and the postoffice; 7, of the revision of accounts. The finances of Norway are remarkable for this, that direct taxes have been abolished there. The budget is always voted for three years, and the financial period commences April 1. The estimate of the expenditures and receipts for the period 1869-72, and the accounts of 1870, in ducats, worth five francs sixty-three centimes each, are as follows: ITEMS. RECEIPTS. 1869-72. 1870. reserve, and three in the landwehr; they are then enrolled in the landsturm, or leveé en masse. Young men who have completed their nineteenth year are liable to be recruited. The navy was composed at the same date of sixteen steamers (156 guns), of which two are frigates, and 103 sailing vessels (507 guns). The naval force embraced, in 1866, 14,754 men.- Norway can not be called a rich country. The climate is not favorable to agriculture, although it is not so cold as its high latitude would seem to imply, but the raising of live stock is important. There were in Norway, in 1855, 154,447 horses, 949,935 horned cattle; 1,596,199 wool-bearing animals, 113,320 hogs, 357,102 goats, and 116,891 reindeer. The useful land is divided into 128,537 estates, but there are also immense forests and other lands, which may be considered as public domains. These forests are a great source of wealth for the country, which carries on a large commerce in lumber, but their wealth must not be considered as inexhaustible. Its fisheries are the principal industry of Norway, the exploitation of its forests ranking only second. The third important branch of industry is mining, but it is far from having the importance it has in Sweden. A large number of Norwegian marines are employed in the transportation of merchandise between twoother countries, where the commerce is relatively active. The imports, which were estimated in 1856-60 at about 15,500,000 ducats a year, rose in 1870 to 26,200,000; and the exports, which attained, 1856-60, only 11,500,000, in 1870 slightly exceeded 20,000,000. The movement of navigation, which in 1861 was 583,000 lasts (two tons) entry, and 529,000 departure, in 1870 was 762,600 en673,800 try and 775,991 departure. The merchant marine in 1861 consisted of 5,493 ships (drawing 276,077 5,234,900 lasts) and in 1870 of 6,993 ships (drawing 486,912 lasts); 118 of these ships were steamers. In December, 1872, there were 496 kilometres of railways and 5,800 kilometres of telegraphs, and the post carried 5,429,198 letters. - Happy under its democratic government, created without the spirit of imitation, Norway is evidently progressing. Public instruction is very wide spread, and besides permanent schools, there are traveling instructors, who bear elementary knowledge even into remote localities. There is a university at Christiania and secondary schools in different cities. Special instruction is not neglected. Taking everything into consideration it can be said that Norway is making great efforts to remain on the level of civilized countries, and that she is succeeding. — BIBLIOGRAPHY. Kraft, Topographisk - statistisk Beskrivelse over Kongeriget Norge, Christiania, 1820–35, and Historisk-topographisk Haandbog over Kongeriget Norge, Christiania, 1845-8; Blom, Das Königreich Norwegen statistisch beschrieben, Leipzig, 1843; Broch, Le royaume de Norvège et le peuple Norvégien, Christiania, 1876; Nielsen, Norwegen, ein praktisches Handbuch für Reisende, 3d ed., Hamburg, 1877; Thorlak, Historia rerum Nor 3,053,800 263,000 323,100 Stamped paper. 77,000 Telegraphs (gross proceeds). 124,000 Silver mines. Miscellaneous receipts. Total EXPENDITURES. 178,000 502,500 5,092,000 1869 72. 147,000 ITEMS. Civil list. Storthing. Council of state, etc.. 189,970 Foreign affairs... 126,565 War.. 1,115,500 73,600 135,000 192,600 1870. 139,400 191 600 125,800 1,118,200 1,030,900 304,900 164,400 453,900 1,217,500 65,900 5,092,000 4,908,500 The debt in 1871 was about 7,500,000 ducats, of which more than five millions were incurred by loans for railways (in 1848 at 4 per cent., and in 1858 at 5 per cent.), and almost a million by a loan contracted in 1851 to establish a state bank. -The standing army in 1873 numbered about 2,000 men (volunteers), but all the inhabitants are |