CHANGES IN EMPIRE

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27665, 23 May 1955, Page 12

CHANGES IN EMPIRE

Commonwealth Power Assessed ADDRESS TO SAVAGE CLUB The changes that have taken place in the British Empire since the eighteenth century were summed up on Saturday evening by Mr L. W. Stewart, rector of St. Andrew’s College, in an address given to members of the Christchurch Savage Club at an Empire night korero. One of the most significant changes, he said, was the dropping of the title “British Empire” for the “British Commonwealth of Nations” and latterly to the “Commonwealth of Nations and Empire.” It was significant to note that in this last title the word “British” had been omitted, he said. Before speaking of the Empire as it is today, Mr Stewart briefly traversed the history of the founding of the British Empire, the loss of the American colonies, the gradual change from colonial to Dominion status, and the forming of republics throughout the eighteenth, nineteenth and twentieth centuries. “It would be foolish to deny that the British Empire has not diminished,” said Mr Stewart, when speaking of the present day. “It has lost India and Burma, and there has been serious trouble in Malaya, Kenya, and South Africa. Much criticism has been levelled at Great Britain by the United States for her treatment of India. “Not only has the Empire shrunk, but it has changed in composition. When India became an independent republic she announced that she wished to remain in the Commonwealth. What was her position to be and what was to be her relation to the head of the British Commonwealth, namely, the Crown? If India was refused admittance to the Commonwealth she might join the Communist, bloc. So she was allowed to have her place, but the whole structure of the British Commonwealth was consequently confused and constituent members raised the question of the legality of her position,” he In 1952 the British Commonwealth of Nations was changed to the Commonwealth of Nations and Empire, the word British being dropped at the request of India, said Mr Stewart. “It is said today that India is beginning to turn to Britain and the Commonwealth, and is no longer likely to become Communist. If that is so, then Britain has gained some reward,” he said. , “Holds the Balance” ‘Where does the Commonwealth stand today? Has it lost all its former immense importance?” asked Mr Stewart. “Out of the great struggle of 1939-1945, two great Powers have emerged—the United States and Soviet Russia. It is in relation to the great political systems that the strength of the Commonwealth stands today, for both seek the friendship and alliance of the Commonwealth of Nations. “Up to the present the tendency has .been definitely towards America, but if the Labour Party wins the election and Aneurin Bevan becomes in time its leader, he with his openly expressed sympathy with Russia might change this policy. “The strength of the Commonwealth lies in the fact that she holds the balance between the two systems, it may, however, be that the component parts of the Commonwealth may not be willing to follow Great Britain under a Labour government,” said Mr Stewart. “In spite of these changes in the outward fabric of the Commonwealth, it continues to be a potent factor m the aiffars of men and of nations, due in large measure to the British genius for compromise, their fluid, unrigid political system and their toleration towards subject peoples. 1 believe, too, that underlying all her energies and all her materialism, is a spiritual consecration —a feeling for invisible values which, if inarticulate on most occasions, is at least spontaneous and perhaps indestructible,” Mr Stewart concluded.