1ef
ald
its
-he
he
he
in

-an
ew
2n-
ter

to
ule
ld

ian
1de
bly
Dy-
1512
nat
1 nd

120
red
18
it
m-
ile

‘ort
ns
uld
hat
ap”
ues
ach
le

relations to the confusion of the United States and the aggrandize-
ment of France is hard to understand.

“In the first place, French trade with Russia is not of a char-
acter to profit by any losses that this country might sustain in deal-
ings with the Soviets. Secondly, interference with gold shipments
is merely a pin prick by comparison with the major obstacles to the
development of Russo-American trade which are created by the re-
fusal of the United States to establish a definite basis for trade with
Russia.”

New York Times, April 10, 1928
THE “SOVIET GOLD”
“The question what became of the old Russian Imperial Bank’s
gold reserve after the Bolshevist coup d'etat in 1917 has long been
shadowed in mystery, but interest in it now bids fair to be super-
seded by the question about the international status of the gold now
held by the Soviet national bank. The $5,200,000 gold sent by that
institution last February to establish a Russian credit balance at
New York knocked at doors and was denied admission ; no one was
ready to conform to the Government's requirement and ‘guarantee
title.” This was unusual enough, but a still more singular controversy
followed, of which the end is not yet.

Friendless as the $5,200,000 gold appeared to be, a legal claim
for it was put in by agents of the Bank of France and the Bank
of Rumania on the ground that in 1917 the Soviet had seized and
misappropriated gold held by the old Russian bank for their account.
Eventually, however, and without withdrawal of the law-suits, the
Soviet gold was quietly shipped out last week to Germany. What
Germany will do about it is not yet known. Probably the gold will
be received in a friendly spirit, seeing that remittances of Russian
gold have been accepted without question during the past year, not
only by the Reichsbank but by the Bank of England.

“Counsel for the Bank of France declare, however, that if the
courts were to sustain its claim the New York banks which held the
gold would be responsible for it, even with the gold back again in
Europe. So the litigation still has possibilities. But the controversy
has some confusing aspects. The Soviet bank has been quoted, in
the first place, as declaring that it has nothing to do with ‘pre-rev-
olutionary reserves’; that it had not itself gone into business at all
until 1921, since when it has accumulated its present reserve of
$90,000,000 from new Russian production in the Ural. It might still
be contended that at the time of the Bolshevist coup d’etat the

SR