DEFENCE AND, FINANCE

Evening Post, Volume CXVI, Issue 111, 7 November 1933, Page 6

DEFENCE AND, FINANCE

(To the Editor.)

Sir,—l* thank you for granting apace-to stress the need for adequate defence'protection against any aggressor nation. Your footnote to my* last letter was duly noted, and" though you state that the Government had been in close consultation with British experts in all arms of the service, could not Mr. Forbes simply state that the choice of aeroplanes as a main defence, for our shores had. the approval: of the Admiralty? In a matter of defence against naval attack to ignore the advice of the Admiralty would be extremely foolish. You also state that the greater;'part-of Britain's wartime expenditure was financed by interest-bearing loans. That is obvious when one studies the-huge external and internal war debts. But there' is also the smaller part financed by ■ the English Treasury note, commonly known as the "John Bradbury..?' . This fiduciary issue lias never been backed by gold, and, it would be ridiculous to say it was backed by Treasury bills or any other security issued by the same Government. This issue of £260000,000 and the amount brought back to the Treasury by taxation were entirely free of interest, and theissue is in circulation today, nineteen years after the date of issue, and will; continue to be, perhaps,,for ever.—l am, etc., *

G. H. WILKIN,