There is a natural regret here that this country and India are no longer to be bound by common allegiance to the Crown. Yet there would have been an anomaly in the connection if it had continued. An Indian Government would not be fortified by being carried on in the British King's name, because the British Crown in India does not enjoy centuries of prestige, and is not part of the people's folklore. Monarchy means one thing in Great Britain; it has other associations in the land of maharajahs and great moghuls. King George could not plausibly be regarded as the heir of Asoka and Akbar, even if India had desired that the special Indian tradition of monarchy should continue. In discarding the Crown, India has not renounced other parts of the British political legacy. Its enthusiasm for republicanism as a theory of government is really quite Western. It is surprising that its new Constitution embodies almost nothing of the reformist or Oriental ideas of Mr. Gandhi. The Constitution is the Government of India Act of 1935, adapted to new conditions and given an infusion of American ideas.

India's proclamation of itself as a republic while remaining in the Commonwealth raises questions about the nature of the Commonwealth as a whole. A periodical stock-taking of political concepts is useful. As long as all the Dominions were linked by allegiance to the Crown, the Commonwealth wore the look of being a super-State. Although statesmen of the Commonwealth had many discussions about creating such a super-State, they decided against it. The Commonwealth today is a machinery for international collaboration. It exists for convenience of its members. It may therefore be easier in future for States currently outside it to associate themselves with it. In doing so they will not endanger their sovereign independence or compromise their links with other countries.

Will Republican India continue to remain in the Commonwealth? Presumably it is satisfied that its point of view is understood by other members. In fact, India's interest in its Commonwealth membership may increase rather than lessen. India has proprietorial rights in the Commonwealth as much as any other member. If it does not like the way it is functioning it can try to reconstruct the machinery. India certainly will not swallow for long the racial ideas of South Africa or the White Australia policy.

India may simply regard the Commonwealth for what it is – a political machinery used to promote peace and economic advancement, but from which a larger machinery may eventually grow.