Reader's letter of the day

From the FT:

Sir,

It is unworthy of Samuel Brittan to criticise the “supposedly virtuous mid-Victorian period” in discussing the high level of the national debt (How the budget hole developed, July 24).

The national debt was high at the start of the Victorian period because this country had been fighting the Napoleonic Wars for a generation (and four other major wars throughout the 18th century, each lasting at least seven years).

Roughly half the cost was covered by current taxation and half by loans. Between 1840 and 1890, while the national product rose from £440m to £1,265m, the total net liabilities of the state fell from £840m to £685m.

Thus in 50 years the national debt steadily fell from 190 per cent of national product to 55 per cent. And none of this decline was due to currency debasement: the Victorians, unlike modern politicians, didn’t go in for that.

D.R. Myddelton, London W9, UK.

I for one would like to see a government to reducing the national debt a bit faster than by 3% of GDP every year, but hey ...