Viewing page 74 of 86

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

^[[checkmark]]

WJ:KP

December 19th, 1933.

Gifford Cochran, Esq.,
19 Beckman Place,
New York City.

Dear Sir:

In regard to our recent statement of your account, covering the Cranach Painting, we learn from your secretary and from Mr. R. H. Waegen that you wish to have some further information about how this sale was made as based on the gold parity.

You will easily remember the situation that existed last April in the monetary markets.  The U.S. Government had abandoned the Gold Standard and had declared officially that it was its intention to bring the dollar to a lower level.  There was and is no way of knowing how far the depreciation of the dollar will go.  When, therefore, you offered to buy the Cranach Painting at the price of $16,000.-, which is below the actual cost, our Mr. Germain Seligmann found himself in the position to be able to accept that price only on the basis of the actual value of the dollar on that date (April 27th), so that our firm would not have to stand any further loss which would have made us lose a further part of our cost price.

From the point of view of an international firm, such an eventuality had necessarily to be protected against.  Mr. Germain Seligmann, therefore, made a condition of the sale that the sum of $16,000.- should be paid on the gold parity of April 27th, as the sale was not a cash transaction but was payable over a long period of time.  Our firm gets no advantage out of this as all subsequent payments are made with a dollar depreciated in relation to the great money markets of Paris and London, in the curriencies of which practically all our purchases have to be paid.  The gold parity is fixed and published from time to time by the U. S. Treasury.

As you noticed from our statement, you actually received a premium of $787.50 for your payment in French Francs, as compared to the value of the

t.s.v.p......