Viewing page 61 of 101

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

[[preprinted]]
JOHN J. CUNNINGHAM
111 EAST SIXTY-FIFTH STREET
NEW YORK 21, NEW YORK
REGENT 7-9880
[[/preprinted]]

August 17th., 1962

Dear Germain:

More news from Porter & Porter, or Mr. Bernaschina.

When you shall have read the contents, and given adequate attention to the "proprietor in Spain" detail, perhaps you will wish to drop the whole thing into the waste basket, or at least, into the Post for Paris in the envelope which I have prepared for just that. ^[[Retaining his letter and list! J.]]

Why he continues to write to me I cannot imagine, but it is a habit I suppose. He gave me quite a dressing down in one of his letters because Mr. Rockafeller had not returned a photograph (which Mr. Bernaschino required me to salvage for him although I had nothing to do with the matter) and said that MY DELAY had  made him lose an improtant sale. And now comes this.

If ever I do write him, I shall point out the fact that he persists in sending me [[underline]]carbon copies[[/underline]] of the lists which he circulates throughout the world, and that he persists in his bad habit of mentioning names of people with whom he is dealing or who have refused to reply to his importunities. (vide Mr. Rousseau).  But it is perhaps dangerous even to let him have a letterhead....even with a refusal.

If you want the MIGUEL ANGE you will have to [[underline]]ack[[/underline]] quickly as "[[underline]]Mr. Austin of London[[/underline]] IS QUITE INTERESTED." Jesting aside, I thought you might use this information as a small bit to fit into a mosaic of information which you [[underline]]may[[/underline]] have. I shall recompense you for the stamp money on your return to which I look forward.

With very kind regards to you both, 

Sincerely,

[[signed]]John[[/signed]]
John J. Cunningham

German Seligman, Esq.,
Chalet Graa,  Gstaad, B0
Switzerland.

^[[He will be baffled to have photos etc from Gstaad! with N.Y return address.]]

Transcription Notes:
changed the spelling of important back to the mis-spelling as in the actual letter (improtant) in the 3rd paragraph