Your editorial (“The Tories loosen the ties that bind”, 9 January) on Scottish independence sums up the situation very accurately. I became a supporter of independence as an undergraduate at Edinburgh University in the 1950s. As part of the Bachelor of Laws course I was asked to write an essay on the Treaty of Union of 1707. It was an eye-opener. To quote Paul H. Scott, the Scots Parliament was brought to accept the Union by “bribery, appeals to self-interest and military intimidation”. A grave injustice cries out to be put right.

Jamus Smith
Aberdeen

Your editorial states that the union between Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England cannot be regarded as permanent and you refer to the principle of self-determination, citing Catalonia and the Basque region. I do not think the analogy is useful.

Undoing the effects of the Acts of Union should require the consent by simultaneous plebiscites of all affected nations – why should the people of Wales not have a separate voice on the departure of Scotland from the United Kingdom? Unlike Brexit, the terms of separation should be agreed in detail before any voting takes place. Moreover, a substantial rather than a simple majority would be preferable to establish an unimpeachable outcome.