AS we noted two days ago, the public mood is not republican. The

corollary of that is simple: we want a monarch we can respect and regard

with affection. The Queen herself has never been in serious danger of

losing that respect or affection. But the puerile antics of some cadet

members of the royal family -- and the apparent inability of her

children to sustain their marriages -- have placed the institution of

the monarchy under greater strain than it has been for several

generations. And as the Queen is the supreme symbol of the institution,

some of the opprobrium directed at the younger royals was bound to stick

to her. What was needed to revive public esteem was a significant

gesture. In the dark days of the war, the Queen's father and mother

engendered enormous public goodwill by simply refusing to move from

Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle. When the palace was bombed in

September, 1940, the royal family were justifiably perceived to be

living in solidarity with the blitzed families of the East End of

London.

What the Queen did yesterday, in agreeing to be taxed, was a similar

gesture. It was a signal that as a woman of wealth she wanted to show

solidarity with her subjects in these straitened and difficult times. It

would be absurd to compare our current economic predicament, serious as

it is, with the crisis of 1940, when the nation was battling for its

very survival. Yet in the 1990s many British people are experiencing

acute uncertainty and financial stress. At a stroke, the monarch has

shown that she does not wish to be perceived as aloof, apart, and

indifferent. The Exchequer may not benefit from her gesture by as much

as the wilder projections of her allegedly colossal income have

indicated. But this gesture is not about public finance; it is rather

about personal goodwill.

There remains the longer problem of the royal family: the frivolity

and immaturity of its younger members. The Queen has acted; it would now

be fitting if some of the other royals showed a little respect for the

rest of the nation and worked a little harder, both at their own

personal relationships and at their wider responsibilities. The eventual

wellbeing of the monarchy does not rest with the Queen, or her often

underestimated consort, or indeed her venerable mother, but rather with

the young folk who have so far failed the test of public scrutiny

lamentably.