THE PALACE STANDARD.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume 8, Issue 78, 31 March 1916, Page 2

THE PALACE STANDARD.

wHAi', 'iiiA'i' THING?”

NEW ZEALANLEiv'S GiUTiCISM.

A paragraph in the London “Chronicle” says:—

“It was difficult to make the New Zealander believe that the flag over Buckingham Palace was the Royal Standard. “What, that thing? he asked. “Why, it’s dirty, and so small you can’t make out the lions of England. We think a lot of those lions over there.” One felt rather humiliated. Surely there should be a great Royal Standard over the Palace, rolling and rippling in the wind, flashing its colours to watching eyes. Only the hopelessly unimaginative can fail to see the symbolism of the Standard, and the man in the street wants to see it. There was nothing inspiring to the New Zealander in that poor apology for the flag fcr which he had been fighting. This is one of the small matters that really mean a good deal to a good many people. Everyone in the little ground round the New Zealander agreed with him.”

The New Zealander, it may be, had ebery justification for his criticism of the Palace flag, which for some time past has answered exceedingly well to Tommy Atkins’ description “That bloomin’ old rag overhead.” Still, in times like these it is perhaps just as well to show some outward and visible signs cf the war economies that we understand are being practised with the King’s Louden residence. Royal Standards of such generous dimensions as our New Zealanders expected to see waving over the main entrance to Buckingham Palace “come exneusive”; moreover, a flag that has “done its bit” is much more in keeping with the always more or less dingy outward appearance of the royal residence. A new Standard would only serve to emphasise the economy in paint which has been observed by those responsible for the exterior condition of the Palace.