Re: "Scotland's case for autonomy," Feb. 5.

I appreciate that recognition is given to the Scots who have helped make Britain what it is, as well as contributing to lands around the world. As a Scot, however, I find some inaccuracies in the editorial.

First, Scotland would never consider itself a colony of England. Despite being conquered from time to time by martial might, Scotland finally joined with England because the heir to the English throne was the king of Scotland. Some might even say Scotland conquered England by producing a rightful heir after Queen Elizabeth I died.

Second, the Union of the Parliaments came 100 years later in 1707 for economic reasons, and was voted on at the time. Scotland had governed itself for most of its history until that time as well as most of the European states.

Third, Gaelic is the language of only the Gaels of the Scottish Highlands and is not the universal language of Scotland.

As a footnote, many Scots look across the North Sea to Norway, a country with much the same population as Scotland, and note that Norway prospered from its oil reserves, unlike Scotland where the British corporations profited and left little for Scotland. Would that she could have controlled that rich discovery.

Christine Johnston

Victoria