In your leader about bank reform in Britain you laud the country for its financial innovations over the past few decades (“Good Fences,” September 17, 2011). In your words, the Independent Commission on Banking has proposed “an experiment every bit as bold as the previous ones.” Namely, it suggests splitting the country’s banks into retail and commercial banking, on the one hand, and investment banking, on the other. In the associated article, you praise the commission’s chairman, John Vickers, as an “independent-minded economist” (“To Rip Asunder”). So far, so good. But then you mention in passing that the division between the two kinds of banks was first introduced in America after the Great Depression. However, the Glass-Steagall act, which introduced it, was whittled down over the years, before it was finally scrapped in 1999. In short, the suggested innovation is not all that innovative, after all. In addition, the American precedent shows quite clearly what are its long-term prospects.