The Declaration of Arbroath is beacon of hope in a world of totalitarian regimes

Alexander Mckay (Letters, 9 April) is mistaken if he thinks the Declaration of Arbroath had no connection with the US Declaration of Independence.

It is true that the word declaration was later borrowed back from the US Declaration of Independence, but the text of the US document is copied almost word for word from the Declaration of Arbroath of 1320 and the Solemn League and Covenant of 1638, as Duncan A Bruce’s book The Mark of the Scots makes clear.

Almost certainly the text was produced by the Reverend John Witherspoon, an Ayrshire minister who founded Princeton University.

Murdo Fraser’s contention that the Treaty of Union of 1707 was a voluntary choice of the Scots Parliament (Scotsman, 8 April) is untrue as it was forced through by bribery, threats and trickery and there were riots in Edinburgh after the terms were made known.

The Declaration of Arbroath is important because it reiterates that Scottish kings ruled by consent of the people, as implied by the fact that there were no Kings of Scotland, only Kings of Scots, unlike in England where they ruled by conquest. As Voltaire later said: “The king is for the people, not the people for the king”.the French finally cottoned on with Louisphilippe, King of the French.

The Declaration of Arbroath, far from being “a nationalist shibboleth” is instead a beacon of hope in a world of totalitarian regimes.

COLIN MCALLISTER South Street, St Andrews

The Declaration of Arbroath should more accurately be named the Declaration of Independence.

Just as David Cameron conspired with Stirling’s Tory council to undermine the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn by holding British Armed Forces Day on the same weekend, hardline Unionists continue to downplay expressions of Scottish self determination.

Of course, the 1638 National Covenant was important and secured many signatures (Alan Sutherland, Letters, 9 April). However, the National Covenant of 1949 secured over one million signatures demanding Home Rule but this was ignored by the Labour government of the day.

In the words of the 1320 document, we are still “subjected to the lordship of the English” as Westminster continues to hold the main levers of power and control over the Scottish economy.

The latest four opinion polls would not be showing support for independence at 50 per cent if the Unionist parties had honoured their lastgasp promise of “near federalism” in 2014. Subsequently, Labour, Tory and Lib Dems all voted against transferring significant powers during the Smith Commission and the 2016 Scotland Act.

Now Brexit is being used to remove powers from Holyrood. Opportunist calls for federalism are only made when support for independence is rising.

FRASER GRANT Warrender Park Road, Edinburgh