A G REESON cannot understand a reader's reference to Great Britain's "shameful past" (Letters, August 31). He sees the slave trade in the British colonies as being "acceptable at the time" and indeed "encouraged by the church as a means of introducing Christianity".

That's all well and good, but how would he feel if his own ancestors had crossed the Atlantic as slaves in filthy British vessels to work on plantations for 17 hours a day?

If Britain's slave trading was built on decent intentions, why hasn't this been acknowledged yet by the United Nations?

Actually, the official UN view on the British slave trade is enough to embarrass even the staunchest ex-colonialist. At a UN conference held in Durban in the summer of 2001, it was "acknowledged" that slavery and the slave trade were "a crime against humanity", calling for "reparation" to be paid to restore the dignity of the victims.

As someone totally fed up with people trying to explain away Britain's colonial slave trade, may I suggest that we label it precisely what it was - evil.

Aled Jones,

Mount Crescent, Bridlington.

Updated: 11:31 Monday, September 05, 2005