QUEEN‘S TITLE

Press, Volume LXXXVIII, Issue 26662, 22 February 1952, Page 7

QUEEN‘S TITLE

CLARIFICATION OF STYLE SOUGHT

LONDON, February 20. The former Secretary of State for Commonwealth Relation), Mr Patr.ck Gordon-Walker, to-day called for a clarification of the Royal title as a result of the variety of definition* given at Queen Elizabeth’s accession.

He said that the latest proclamation was the first at which the normal Royal title had been departed from—and that on a considerable scale —in London, Canberra, Wellington, Karachi, and Colombo. This had been done, principally by the inclusion of the words "Head of the Commonwealth” in the British, Australian, New Zealand, and Pakistan declaration, and also in the formal message of greeting from the Indian Prime Minister (Mr Nehru). Mr Gordon-Walkpr said that the use of the words “Head of the Commonwealth” for the first time was of great significance.

"The statutory Royal title can only be altered by Acts of all the Parliaments of the Commonwealth, because the Crown is the symbol of the free association of all the members of the Commonwealth,” he said. "But the Queen is also Queen of each of her realms, and, as such, she is proclaimed separately in each realm.” Mr Gordon-Walker said that Canada, which made the proclamation first of all, and South Africa, used substantially the same version as was used on the accession of King George VI. Australia and New Zealand used the new version, given on this occasion at the Court of St. James in London.

He continued: "The versions used in London, Canberra, and Wellington are more in accord with the idecs often ,

expressed by Canada and South Africa than the older version of the proclamation that they themselves issued." But, said Mr Gordon-Walker, to some extent this was accidental, and Canada and South Africa would have used the London version had it not been for the problem of time.