§ Mr. C. BATHURSTasked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he has been credibly informed, and now realises, that the statement quoted in his letter to Sir J. Jordan, of 23rd August, part of the correspondence on the Chinese 586W loan negotiations (White Paper, Cd. 6446), to the effect that Lloyds Bank, the London County and Westminster Bank, and the Capital and Counties Bank were members of a syndicate, and as such were negotiating a loan of £10,000,000 with the Chinese Government, is wholly without foundation; and that two of the said banks consented to act solely as bankers in the event of the loan being negotiated, but that none of them were otherwise concerned in the transactions to which the above White Paper refers?
§ Sir E. GREYThe impression given by Mr. Crisp on his first visit to the Foreign Office certainly was that he represented a syndicate composed of Lloyds Bank, the Capital and Counties Bank, and the London and South-Western Bank. It was subsequently ascertained that the impression conveyed did not correspond with the facts. The London County and Westminster Bank was inadvertently named in the dispatch referred to in place of that of the London and South-Western Bank.