sir,
COFY,
12, Token zae Yard,
LONDON, 8th May, 1916.
FREDERICK HUTH & CO.,
24728
177
REC REG 26 MAY 16]
I laid the contents of your letter of the 1st of May before my Committee at a recent Meeting, when the who le matter you deal with was given most careful consideration.
was requested to inform you that this question has already been before them on two separate occasions, and it was suggested that I should send you a copy of my letters to Mr. Blackett of the Treasury of the 17th of January, and to Kr. Ashley of the Board of Trade of the 7th of April last. These you will find enclosed.
I may perhaps be permitted to add that in giving all credits, whether with or without letters of lien, the Banker is accustomed to be guided firstly by the means and standing of the firm asking for a credit, and in the second place only, by the collateral security offered.
Letters of Lien and Trust Receipts are taken as collateral security by Bankers, but it is well known that thes documents, besides forming a very doubtful security in a Court of
At the same
Law, are very difficult to carry out to the letter. time Bankers consider that credits covered by letters of lien or trust receipts, are better secured than oredits where the documents pass entirely out of the Banker's hands, and for this reason they have habitually required these documents to be given them, when financing exports from Europe to distant countries.
I am desired to emphasize the fact that Bankers and Accepting Houses in London would always give British firme prefer · ence to any foreign firms of equal standing in any part of the
trading
world, and to suggest that the China Association should be required to produce evidence that credits have been refused by London Banker!
¦
and
78.