Readers' letters: The Treaty of Union was signed under duress

In response to Steuart Campbell (Letters 16 July), the Scottish Parliament, which was established in 1235 and consisted of the three estates of the clergy, nobility and burgh representatives, may have voted for a Union in 1707 but it was under duress.

The English Parliament’s Alien Act of 1705 hastened the Union by threatening that all Scottish Estates held in England by non-residents were to be considered as alien property in law unless the Scottish Parliament had entered into treaty negotiations by Christmas Day 1705.

In addition, an embargo was to be placed on major Scottish products being imported into England. This was at a time when it is estimated that almost 50 per cent of Scottish exports, mainly linen and black cattle, were destined for English markets.

At the time Scotland had no debt but the English national debt was £18 million and Article XV of the Treaty of Union granted £398,085 and ten shillings sterling to Scotland – a sum known as The Equivalent – to offset future liability towards the English national debt. Most of the sum was used to compensate the investors in the Darien scheme, many of whom were in the Scottish Parliament and then persuaded to support the Union. A “parcel of rogues” as described by Robert Burns.

A member of staff at The National Archives of Scotland, in Edinburgh, looks over the Act of Union of the Scottish Parliament

It was hardly a voluntary union as it was opposed by all the churches and burghs in Scotland and widespread rioting followed news that the Treaty of Union had been signed.

Article XIX of the treaty contains the words “...that no causes in Scotland be cognizable by the Courts of Chancery... or any other Court in Westminster Hall”. Therefore, it can be argued that the UK Supreme Court breaches the Treaty of Union

Fraser Grant, Edinburgh

Swallowed up

The Union of Scotland and England was achieved by the Treaty of Union in which the members of the Scottish and English Parliaments (neither democratically elected) agreed to form a new “British" Parliament.

This did not happen as Westminster decided that, contrary to the agreement reached, there would be no new joint Parliament but “the English Parliament continuing” which would incorporate – ie swallow up – the Scottish Parliament. Perhaps this is why no new Bank of Britain was introduced.

Since the members of the Scottish Parliament signed the Treaty it is they, now elected under a fully democratic system – unlike the Westminster Parliament, still essentially the English Parliament by virtue of numbers and free to change anything it likes – who have the right to express the will of the people of Scotland about such matters as whether they wish to withdraw from a Treaty in which almost every clause has been broken. Self-determination is a right under all international laws.

It is curious that the people of Scotland were torn out of Europe despite their vote to remain, and despite their being told that only a no vote in 2014 would ensure their remaining in Europe, yet a democratic advisory referendum, which is within the Scottish Parliament’s powers and is not constitutional in any way until acted upon, is attacked.

Susan FG Forde, Scotlandwell, Perth & Kinross

Brass tacks

If the SNP contributors to the Scotsman letters page (and the “leadership”) want to convince us of Scotland being better off alone then perhaps a simple set of accounts showing income and expenditure and balance sheet would be a good place to start instead of motherhood statements ad nauseum.

Derek Sharp, Edinburgh

Democratic deficit

I note that in the paper launched on Thursday by the First Minister purporting to make the case for a fresh independence referendum she states that Scotland is facing a democratic deficit (Scotsman, 15 July). This is on the basis that the new Prime Minister of the United Kingdom will be one that “we” have not voted for and who will impose policies that “we” do not support.

Apart from the fact that Ms Sturgeon, who I understand has a law degree, clearly does not understand the UK Constitution, whereby constituents elect MPs from their chosen party, rather than voting for a Prime Minister or First Minister as the case may be, I wonder when “we” might expect a paper from her expounding her views on the democratic deficit that, on the basis of her definition, clearly pertains in Scotland.

Ms Sturgeon’s party did not receive the votes of the majority of Scottish voters and accordingly I, and other supporters of the Union, of whichever party – Tory, Liberal Democrat or Labour – have for the past 15 years been subject to an SNP administration led by a First Minister for whom we did not vote.

In fact, the current administration is propped up by members of the Green Party for whom fewer than 35,000 Scots voted and two of whom have been given ministerial roles in made-up jobs at vastly inflated salaries paid for by the taxpayer. A democratic deficit indeed!

Kate Marshall, Edinburgh

Sunak impresses

There have been 13 Prime Ministers in my lifetime (I remember my shock when, sitting on my potty, news of Eden’s resignation came over the radio). In the absence of Hunt, Gove, and Javid the only one on view in Friday's debate who looked like Prime Minister material was Rishi Sunak. He even admitted government help such as £1,200 for the most vulnerable can't solve all cost of living problems.

Mind you, he didn't remind us of the real looming disaster: when inflation was over ten per cent in the 80s, mortgage rates peaked at 15 per cent. In these days of average £135k mortgages, £225K house prices and two per cent interest rates, that means monthly interest payments rising from £300 to £1700. But neither has any politician, including his rivals whose “I feel your pain” piety and “I can fix this. Here's – sort of – how” claims were vague and patronising.

The main attacks on Sunak seem to come from diehards in denial that Boris had to go, and see Sunak as chief knife-wielder, and accusations that he is soft on independence compared with Truss or Mordaunt.

Scotland needs more than “Yellow Wall” bribes and “now is not the time” putdowns. The next UK PM should be lifting economic, job and trade prospect across the UK, showing Scots that it’s the place to be and galvanising his plodding Scottish party to create health, education, housing, local government and transport policies that win elections and, along with Labour and the Lib Dems, turfing the SNP out of Westminster, Holyrood and councils.

It's a "big ask” of any politician, especially when many of our problems are of our own social and cultural making.

I don't care about the next PM's colour, class, religion, sex, bank balance or party, but I do I think Rishi Sunak is the best contender currently on display.

Allan Sutherland, Stonehaven, Aberdeenshire

Take your pick

Are Conservative Members of Parliament so dumb that they are incapable of choosing their leader in one ballot? Why does the process have to be repeated again and again?

Hasan Beg, Kirkcaldy, Fife

Rogues’ gallery

The line-up of potential candidates to be Tory leader and Prime Minister would be hilarious if it wasn’t so serious.

The quality of candidate ranges from the laughable (Liz Truss) to the disingenuous (Rish Sunak) to the utterly dull (Tom Tugenhadt, Penny Mordaunt)

How anyone could see Margaret Thatcher tribute act Liz Truss as PM material is mind-boggling, not to say frightening. I’d worry about putting her in charge of a WI fundraising committee. The fabulously wealthy Sunak is the chancellor who has “lost” more public money on his watch than any other in history (£16 billion and counting), American green card and wife’s chosen non-dom status notwithstanding, but thinks he has the ability to run the whole country. Mordaunt is a Navy reservist… and that is all there is to say about her.

Even less can be said about Kemi Badenoch because there is little to be said other than that her ability is in inverse proportion to her hugely unrealistic ambition. Only the slightly less Johnson-tainted Tugenhadt would give the Tories even a slim hope of challenging in the next general election but he has no chance of winning this battle of the intellectual flyweights.

I disagreed with most of Margaret Thatcher’s policies but no-one could deny she was fiercely intelligent, had a vision and surrounded herself with political big beasts like Howe, Joseph, Heseltine and Lawson. She must be spinning in her grave at the thought of any of these current clueless individuals becoming a Prime Minister and leader of her party.

D Mitchell, Edinburgh

Water waste

Use of water restrictions are on the horizon. When we recycle household plastics, for example plastic bottles, tubs etc, we are told they are to be rinsed before going in the bin.

The British Plastics Federation estimates that 46 per cent of plastic waste is incinerated, 17 per cent goes to landfill, ten per cent is recycled in the UK and 19 per cent is shipped abroad, allegedly for recycling.

What is the point of using precious water to rinse plastics when only ten per cent of it is recycled here? The system needs to be improved quickly., Ian Balloch

Grangemouth, Falkirk

Baby talk

Through the bowel screening process I recently received the good news that there were no cancer cells found in my “poo”.

I wonder if I can I look forward to my forthcoming mammogram resulting in an all-clear for my “boobies"?

Shirley McVitie, Edinburgh

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line. Do not send letters submitted elsewhere. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading.

Subscribe

Subscribe at www.scotsman.com/subscriptions