sabato 28 settembre 2019

ECB: two pending cases at the EU Court of Justice on CARIGE Bank



A CARIGE Bank shareholder has brought two actions against ECB at the European Court of Justice.

Taking into account article 340 of the European Treaty - the ECB is liable for damages - we read the following text of the plaints done by a shareholder of Banca CARIGE:


Language of the case: Italian

Parties
Applicant: Francesca Corneli (Velletri, Italy) (represented by: F. Ferraro, lawyer)
Defendant: European Central Bank

Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
annul the ECB Executive Board’s decision of 29 May 2019, ref L/LDG/19/182, refusing access to the ECB’s decision to place Banca Carige S.p.A., having its registered office in Genoa, Italy, under special administration and to the relevant case file, and order the defendant to produce and submit to the Court the abovementioned decision and all prior, preparatory, related and consequent acts; and
order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments
This action has been brought for the annulment of the ECB Executive Board’s decision of 29 May 2019, ref L/LDG/19/182, refusing access to the ECB’s decision to place Banca Carige S.p.A., having its registered office in Genoa, Italy, under special administration and to the relevant case file, and for an order that the defendant produce and submit to the Court the abovementioned decision and all prior, preparatory, related and consequent acts.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 4 of ECB Decision 2004/3 and misapplication of the exception relating to the confidentiality of information that is protected as such under EU law.
The applicant claims in this respect that the contested decision is unlawful in so far as it lacks actual evidence indicating the confidential parts of the document at issue, their function and their purpose within the ECB and the risks attached to their disclosure. It claims that, in weighing up the various interests, there is no doubt that savers’ specific interest in protecting their shareholding as well as the efficiency and transparency of the governance of the company prevails over the general requirement — in respect of which no reasons are given — to protect supervision procedures.

Second plea in law, alleging failure to state reasons for the confidential nature of the document requested.
The applicant claims in this respect that the ECB fails to offer any reasons for its claim that the contested act is confidential, merely stating, as if it were obvious, that protecting its supervision procedures justifies the refusal of access.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 7(1) and 8(1) of ECB Decision 2004/3 and failure to state reasons.
The applicant claims in this respect serious infringement of Articles 7(1) and 8(1) of Decision 2004/3 and failure to state reasons, since the conditions for a general presumption of confidentiality are not satisfied and in any event the ECB failed to carry out a specific assessment of the documents to which access was requested.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of the fundamental right to effective judicial protection (Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union) and of Articles 7(3) and 8(2) of ECB Decision 2004/3.

The applicant claims in this respect that the ECB cannot completely thwart the interests of the parties to whom the measure is addressed, including the bank’s shareholders, who have the right to effective protection under Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union against the ‘poor’ exercise of official authority. The ECB also infringed Articles 7(3) and 8(2) of ECB Decision 2004/3 since on a number of occasions it has referred to an exceptionally high workload without providing any proof in that regard, in order to extend, by a further 20 days, the time limit laid down for replying to the applicant’s request for access.




Language of the case: Italian

Parties
Applicant: Francesca Corneli (Velletri, Italy) (represented by: M. Condinanzi, L. Boggio and F. Ferraro, lawyers)
Defendant: European Central Bank
Form of order sought
The applicant claims that the Court should:
declare the contested decision to be unlawful and thus null and void;
order the defendant to pay the costs; and
order, as a measure of organisation of procedure, that the contested decision and the subsequent renewal decision, in their respective full versions, be submitted to the Court.

Pleas in law and main arguments
This action has been brought against Decision ECB-SSM-2019-ITCAR-11 of the Governing Council of the European Central Bank of 1 January 2019, adopted on the basis of a draft decision of the Supervisory Board pursuant to Article 26(8) of Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013, 1 pursuant to Articles 69octiesdecies, 70 and 98 of decreto legislativo n. 385 del 1° settembre 1993 (Legislative Decree No 385 of 1 September 1993; ‘the TUB’), transposing Article 29 of Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, in conjunction with Article 9(2) of Regulation (EU) 1024/2013, to dissolve the administrative and supervisory bodies of Banca Carige S.p.A., having its registered office in Genoa, and to replace them with three special administrators and with a supervisory committee formed of three members, respectively.

In support of the action, the applicant relies on five pleas in law.

First plea in law, alleging failure to observe the principle of proportionality and infringement of Articles 28 and 29 of Directive 2014/59/EU 2 and Article 69octiesdecies et seq. of the TUB.
The applicant claims in this respect that early intervention measures need to be introduced gradually, which was not the case here. The most intrusive measure is, therefore, unlawful and void.

Second plea in law, alleging failure to give adequate reasoning as regards the requirements of proportionality and of taking a gradual approach imposed by the overall early intervention system.

Third plea in law, alleging infringement of the last sentence of Article 29(1) of Directive 2014/59/EU and failure to observe the principle of sound public administration.
The applicant claims in this respect that the appointment of members of the former board of directors as temporary administrators amounts to a failure to comply with the obligation to avoid conflicts of interest.

Fourth plea in law, alleging infringement of Article 70 of the TUB, misuse of powers and a failure to provide sufficient reasoning.
The applicant claims in this respect that imposing the special administration on the grounds of serious infringements or irregularities renders the measure contradictory and inconsistent.

Fifth plea in law, alleging infringement of the rules relating to the rights of shareholders contained in Directive (EU) 1132/2017 3 and the Italian Civil Code, as well as those which may be enforced through the fundamental principles enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, in the European Convention on Human Rights and in the Italian Constitution on the protection of property, savings, private economic initiative and the right to self-determination of citizens in personal choices.
____________
1 Council Regulation (EU) No 1024/2013 of 15 October 2013 conferring specific tasks on the European Central Bank concerning policies relating to the prudential supervision of credit institutions (OJ 2013 L 287, p. 63). 

2 Directive 2014/59/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 May 2014 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of credit institutions and investment firms (OJ 2014 L 173, p. 190). 

3 Directive (EU) 2017/1132 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2017 relating to certain aspects of company law (OJ 2017 L 169, p. 46).

lunedì 23 settembre 2019

EZRA POUND: A Victim Of The [Al-Bankaeda] Deep State ?


EZRA POUND: A Victim Of The Deep State ?





POUND

THE YOUNG AMERICAN PEERED through the viewfinder at the naked poet. James Angleton squeezed the shutter once and then again. Ezra Pound went right on talking, as if he didn’t care. 1 Jim, as Pound called him, had just come down from Milan. Upon arrival, the Yale man with black hair and high brown cheekbones had spotted the abode of the expatriate poet from the waterfront below. It took some ingenuity to locate the entrance to number 12 via Marsala in the narrow cobblestone street around back. He hiked up the darkened stairs to the fifth floor and emerged into the bright light of the terraced apartment, where Pound and his wife, Dorothy, welcomed him like an old friend.
In fact, that summer day in 1938 was the first time Jim Angleton and Ezra Pound had met. Pound was fifty-two years old, Angleton a rising college sophomore and expatriate resident of Italy. He knew of Pound through the crystalline poetry of his books Personae and the Cantos (“Songs” in English).
He felt something of a personal connection, too. During his freshman year, he had come across a sketch of Pound in a campus magazine, above the caption “From Idaho to Rapallo.” 2 Jim had made that same intercontinental journey.
Born in Boise, he had lived there and in Dayton, Ohio, until he was sixteen years old, when his family moved to Milan. In the poet’s odyssey from Idaho to Italy, Angleton might have seen the arc of possibility in his own life.
Angleton was taller than his host. He had a Latin complexion and the lithe build of a soccer player. His English accent announced old-world courtesy and quiet good manners. His piercing dark eyes and the perpetual hint of a smile suggested an ironic approach to life.
The couple welcomed Angleton into their neat apartment. Pound, ever alert for potential patrons, knew of Jim’s father, a parvenu who ran the Italian-American Chamber of Commerce in Milan. Hugh Angleton was one of the best-known Americans in northern Italy. 3 He mixed easily among the businessmen and officials associated with the government of Benito Mussolini.
For Pound, who admired Mussolini, this was recommendation enough. He also supposed that the young Angleton could derive from his teaching a necessary education in the complexities of debt, trade, and paper money. And eventually (the poet may well have calculated), Jim’s father might be of some service.
For five days in August 1938, Angleton made himself at home with the Pounds. He had come in search of greatness and found it. He had read the dense poetry of The Fifth Decade of Cantos, published in 1937. He especially admired an early poem of Pound’s, Hugh Selwyn Mauberley, about the universal beauty of poetry. Angleton knew, too, of Pound’s interest in economics, articulated in a series of publications with pedantic titles such as ABC of Economics, Social Credit, and Jefferson and/or Mussolini—the latter a frankly laudatory portrait of the Italian fascist leader. Poetry could not be insulated from revolution and money, Pound insisted. So Jim gave close attention to his political writings as well as to his poetry. 4

* * *

JAMES JESUS ANGLETON WAS born on December 9, 1917, the first of four children of James Hugh Angleton and his wife, Carmen Moreno Angleton.
Hugh, as he was known, had grown up in central Illinois, working as a schoolteacher until he moved to Idaho, where he started out as a candy salesman. He was serving in the Idaho National Guard at a U.S. military post in Nogales, Arizona, when he met Carmen Moreno, born in Mexico but naturalized as a U.S. citizen. It was, according to one account, “a case of love at first sight.” The bride was “one of the Spanish beauties of Nogales and exceedingly popular.” 5 They were married in December 1916 and returned to Boise, where their first child was born, a son. They named him James, and Carmen gave him a Spanish middle name, “Jesus,” which later he would shun.
The Angletons lived in a two-story, two-bedroom bungalow on Washington Avenue in Boise. 6 Hugh took a job as a sales agent for the National Cash Register Company. 7 Sociable and engaging, he was soon promoted.
In 1927, Hugh and Carmen Angleton moved their family to Dayton, Ohio, where Hugh became a vice president of National Cash Register. Jim attended Oakwood Junior High, a public school. 8 In 1933, Hugh bought out NCR’s Italian subsidiary and moved the family to Milan, where he opened his own company, selling cash registers and business machines. Suddenly, the candy salesman was a wealthy man.
In raising their children, Hugh and Carmen emphasized the importance of education and travel. They sent Jim to Malvern College, an exclusive redbrick boarding school in Worcestershire, England. 9 It was there, he said years later, that he learned the importance of duty. 10 His younger brother, Hugh, was sent to Harrow, an even more exclusive English prep school. Carmen, the elder daughter, went to a convent school in Milan and then a girls’ school in Switzerland. Delores, the youngest, would also go to school in England. In the summers, the family reunited in Milan.
Angleton’s upwardly mobile childhood was formative. By the time he arrived at Yale in September 1937, he had resided in three countries, attended public and private schools, spoke three languages, and had lived in circumstances both modest and luxurious. He was an outdoorsman with advanced tastes in poetry, an athlete with an original mind. He displayed a distinctive social style, and—perceptible under the surface—an ambition fueled by the rapid success of his father.
After his freshman year at Yale, he returned to Milan for the summer. He called up the American embassy, asking for the address of the expatriate writer Ezra Pound, and he didn’t relent until he was given it. Then he wrote straightaway. Jim explained he was the photography editor of The Yale Literary Magazine, not mentioning that said journal did not actually publish photographs. 11 Receiving no answer, Jim wrote another letter in longhand ten days later.
“I want only to get a few spirited ideas from you together with a photo....” 12
This plea extracted the desired invitation from the Pounds. And so Angleton drove down from Milan to Genoa and then traced the coastal road to Rapallo. In their summer idyll, the esoteric master and the voracious schoolboy talked and smoked. 13
Pound doted on the company of disciples, and Angleton was looking for wisdom. Angleton wanted to find coherence in the world, and Pound’s mythic poetry offered a place where he could speak a higher language of art. Angleton felt free to wield his camera around the apartment. When they went out onto the apartment’s rooftop terrace overlooking the Gulf of Tigullio one overcast day, Pound stood up and stared into the distance. Jim snapped another photo and later gave it to the poet. Pound thought it the best picture of himself that he had ever seen. 14

* * *

BY THE TIME ANGLETON got back to New Haven in September, his five days with the world-famous Ezra Pound had become, in the retelling, close to five weeks. In one gulp, Angleton had taken in the surface effects of a worldly education. Pound’s reckless ambition, his will to cultural power, his elitism, his conspiratorial convictions, his self-taught craftsmanship, and his omnivorous powers of observation—all these would have influence on the maturing mind of James Angleton.
Angleton took a room at 312 Temple Street with his best friend from freshman year, another aspiring poet, Reed Whittemore. Reed had led a more prosaic childhood as a doctor’s son in New Haven. Whittemore recommended T. S. Eliot’s poem “Gerontion” to his roommate, and Angleton loved it. With its apparent insight into history and its obscure intimations of danger, Eliot’s poem foreshadowed the life of adventure to which Angleton would aspire.

After such knowledge, what forgiveness? Think now

History has many cunning passages, contrived corridors

And issues, deceives with whispering ambitions,

Guides us by vanities. Think now

She gives when our attention is distracted

And what she gives, gives with such supple confusions

That the giving famishes the craving …

“He was quite British in his ways,” Whittemore said of his friend. “He was a mixture of pixiness and earnestness, very much at home in Italian literature, especially Dante, as well as the fine points of handicapping horses.” 15
Angleton’s solitary style was already evident. A student of fly-fishing, he liked to borrow Whittemore’s car and drive off to streams in northwestern Connecticut, where he would spend long hours casting for trout. Yet Whittemore said he never saw a single catch. Angleton spoke of visiting a female friend whom he knew from some other life, but Whittemore never saw her, either. With his English accent, Italian suits, and lofty manner, he was, in Whittemore’s words, “a mystery man.” 16

* * *

YALE COLLEGE OCCUPIED a high position in American intellectual life. Not as patrician as Harvard, nor as provincial as Princeton, Yale served students from a wider range of backgrounds, and it served them differently. 17
The classrooms scattered around the campus in New Haven contained intense islands of scholars, students, and aspiring poets who spoke of a new way of thinking about literature. Angleton, it turned out, had entered one of the more powerful intellectual milieus of mid century America. Yale was the place where the enduring influence of New Criticism began to be felt.
The New Critics were a cohort of literature professors who converged on Yale in the 1930s. They favored a canon of English poetry centered on Shakespeare; the metaphysical poets of the seventeenth century, led by John Donne; and select moderns, such as William Butler Yeats and T. S. Eliot.
Angleton took English 10, an introductory course on poetry, fiction, and drama, with Maynard Mack, a young professor who admired Pound’s poetry. Mack encouraged Angleton’s interest. 18 Mack’s undergraduate seminars were presented as laboratories for young literary scientists, the model for research being drawn from two original-minded English critics, I. A. Richards and William Empson. Richards had been an influential lecturer in English and moral sciences at Cambridge University. In 1939, he became a professor at Harvard. Bill Empson was his most gifted student, a mathematician and poet whose undergraduate thesis became a famous work of literary criticism, Seven Types of Ambiguity.
In the book, Empson offers an argument, supported by interpretations of poems, for the relationship between verbal ambiguity and imaginative value.
From its first publication in 1930, Seven Types of Ambiguity has never gone out of print. Yet at the time, it had not been published in the United States—a neglect that surprised Angleton. When Empson visited Yale, Angleton introduced himself and took the critic out for a long evening of wine and literary talk. He said he would find Empson an American publisher. 19
The New Criticism that Angleton treasured was a powerful method, not merely for its insights into poetry but for its implicitly conservative worldview.
It was not value-free. On the contrary, its proponents would argue vigorously that it was a method deeply rooted in a particular set of values, a method, in the final analysis, for promulgating those values. The elevated strictures of the New Criticism that exalted his favorite poets would prove formative for Angleton. He would come to value coded language, textual analysis, ambiguity, and close control as the means to illuminate the amoral arts of spying that became his job. Literary criticism led him to the profession of secret intelligence. Poetry gave birth to a spy.

SALESMAN

ANGLETON EXTRACTED A FISTFUL of letters from his mailbox in the cramped confines of Yale Station. One of the letters was postmarked “Rapallo.”
When he sliced open the envelope, he had to decipher Ezra Pound’s inimitable orthography.

Dear Jim,

All this is vurry fine and active. How the hell am I to do my own work and take two months off to collect my own bibliography I don’t see. Does the Yale lib/[rary] expect to BUY...? 20

The poet was steamed that Angleton had not fulfilled his promise of compiling a complete bibliography of Pound’s work. Ezra wanted to sell some manuscripts and pay some debts. He was always short of money.
By return mail, Angleton responded with flattering familiarity: “Dear Ezra.”
He reported he was rereading Confucius’s Ta Hio and Pound’s opera Cavalcanti. He saved his biggest news for the last page: He and Reed Whittemore were launching a new magazine called Furioso. “Would you be the Godfather of this?” 21
Angleton was pleased to get Pound’s response ten days later.
“Yes, I’ll back up any and all the proposals in yrs. 19 th instant,” Pound wrote. “But we had better think out WHAT will do the job best. The ‘text book’ ought to be ready soon/you can quote from advance copy of that.” 22
The idea that the great Ezra Pound was sending them a “text book”— whatever that was—sounded more than promising. Angleton described himself as “a very excited piece of protoplasm.” 23
Nonetheless, he was disappointed—no, dismayed—when Pound sent him the long-awaited “text book.” It was not a canto. It was not even poetry. It was a list of Pound’s favorite quotes about coinage, paper money, and debt from John Adams, Thomas Jefferson, and other Founding Fathers. Angleton wasn’t pleased.
He wrote to Pound, deflecting the gift and asking for something more literary.
“Right at this moment Ezra, we are awaiting a canto or something,” Angleton said. “We have to have some verse from you.” 24
Pound did not answer. With Whittemore’s help, Angleton improvised a solution. They dressed up the “text book” quotes with some Roman numerals and stashed it at the back of the issue before they went to press. The red-trimmed first issue of Furioso, adorned by an impish devil wielding a switch, was mailed out in May 1939. Costing just thirty cents, the publication was a literary bargain. In its twenty-eight pages, there was Pound’s odd contribution,and a letter from the poet Archibald MacLeish arguing that the new communications medium of broadcast radio would be the salvation of poetry.
Angleton’s friend E. E. Cummings, also a known poet, contributed a poem. The soon to be renowned Dr. William Carlos Williams added three more. 25
One canny Yale graduate student named Norman Holmes Pearson was especially impressed with this collection of fresh, arresting literary work.
Pearson was a gimpy young man, almost a hunchback. He smoked a pipe and read Sherlock Holmes detective stories for pleasure, which proved to be good cover for the unlikeliest of spies. Pearson made a point of introducing himself to Angleton. 26

* * *

WHEN YALE CLASSES ENDED in May 1939 Angleton returned to Milan by boat. The ten-day voyage took him from New York to Genoa. A train took him to Milan and a reunion with his parents and siblings. Angleton wrote a letter to Pound, asking if he might visit him in Rapallo again. He wanted Pound to meet his father.
Hugh Angleton, then fifty years old, was not a poet or a writer. He was a man of business. Like Ezra Pound, he admired the ambitions and spirit of Italian fascism. “Hugh Angleton was a very tough character,” recalled William Gowen, a young army captain, who would meet both father and son in Rome a few years later. “Jim worshipped his father. Hugh was very aggressive and masculine. Jim was not.” 27
Hugh was an outgoing man, solidly built at five foot eleven, with serious gray eyes. 28 He had installed his family in the Palazzo Castiglioni, an art nouveau palace in the center of Milan. An extrovert and a fine horseman, he betrayed few traces of the raw western frontier from which he came. In the Italian-American Chamber of Commerce, he cultivated friends, dinner companions, and business partners.
In his office on via Dante, Hugh Angleton received visitors from all over Europe. From friends in manufacturing, he learned about the German arms industry. At the Rotary Club, he talked to financiers and industrialists. 29 As a member of the Knights of Malta, he knew influential Catholics. 30 As a Mason, he drew on his friends in the secretive order to keep himself informed about Italian politics. As a man with connections, Hugh wanted to get to know his son’s friend, the great poet, who dared to say fascism and Americanism were two sides of the same coin. Angleton gravitated toward Pound’s view that Italy and America were not enemies. 31 Hugh didn’t disagree.
The newspapers brought more foreboding news every day. Armies were mobilizing across Europe. In August 1914, a global war had erupted, seemingly out of nowhere. In the summer of 1939, the older generation could sense another cataclysm coming.
A few weeks later, on September 1, 1939, Germany invaded Poland, and the war in Europe had begun. Two days later, England and France mobilized to fight Germany. Mussolini rallied to Hitler’s defense, passing a series of anti-Semitic decrees in November 1939. The United States then sanctioned Italy. Angleton’s adopted country was now an enemy of the United States of America.

* * *

IN THE FALL OF 1939, Angleton and Whittemore moved into room 1456 of Pierson College, a pleasant enclosed quadrangle in the heart of the Yale campus. 32 They went to work on the second issue of Furioso, which proved even better than the first, flush with poems from the famous and the promising. Pound’s contribution, alas, was again disappointing. Generously titled “Five Poems,” it consisted of five fragments, alternately whimsical, vulgar, and slight. 33
In his own writing, Angleton had adopted Pound’s resentment of Jews and verbal abuse of President Roosevelt. In February 1940, he wrote to Pound:
“There is hell of a lot of Rooseveltian shillyshally here in America.” He complained the American press favored London over Berlin. “Everything is definitely British and the jews [sic] cause a devil of a lot of stink. Here in New York will be the next great pogrom, and they do need about a thousand ghettos in America. Jew, Jew and Jew, even the Irish are losing out. 34 But Angleton did not write to debate politics. He knew Pound was squeezed by wartime financial measures. He wanted to offer money.
“I talked to Dad on the telephone the day before the war and mentioned the little shekel you might need, say a couple of thousand, and he said o.k.,” Angleton wrote. “So I hope you will oblige by writing him and accept it as a favor.” 35
Pound responded by return mail, acknowledging Angleton’s offer, if not his own acceptance of money.


“Dear JIM, Thanks fr/ yr/ air mail. I am not yet starved to the wall yet but thanks for the practical intentions in yr/ epistle. Neither, of course do I have any intention of relapsing into reminiscence of the Celtic Twilight during a period when twilight sleep is NOT, by hell, being used, for the birth of a new Euroope [sic].”

Pound had something more important in mind than money: a cause.
“A NEW god damn it NEW EUROPE,” he wrote. “All midwives to hand and ready.” 36
As the poet championed the “new Europe” of Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, he sought out Hugh Angleton and his generosity. Pound wrote him in June 1940:

Dear Mr. Angleton,

Jim is all het up for fear that I with poetic imprudence might have failed to putt [sic] by a few biglietti di mille [meaning he had failed to save a few thousand dollars]. I shall still eat/ even if Morgenthau, Hull, and that ass F.D. Roosevelt have succeeded in having the mails blocked and payment on U.S cheques suspended.

In the same letter, he signaled that he was short of funds, at the same time saying that he wished to talk about something “more important than my personal affairs.” He wanted Hugh Angleton’s help in spreading his political views.
“Time has come when I might be a business asset (wild as the idea wd/appear),” he wrote. “I don’t mean in an office but sitting at the seat of news.” 37
Pound wanted to be a practical asset to a businessman like Angleton. Within six months, he began to broadcast his commentaries for Radio Rome, the Italian news outlet heard from Sicily to the Pyrenees.
“What will remain from this struggle is an idea,” Pound declared in early 1941. “What spreads and will spread from the determination to have a New Europe is an idea: the idea of a home for every family in the country. The idea that every family in the country shall have a sane house, and that means a house well built, with no breeding space for tuberculosis bugs....”

Pound likened twentieth-century European fascism to nineteenth-century American democracy in its rejection of collectivism. The new Europe, he said, was merely following in the path of the United States. 38 Over the next four years, Pound would deliver more than 120 speeches over Radio Rome, most of them rife with folksy language, images of infestation, historical references, and anti-Semitism, all wrapped in a belligerent spirit of racial chauvinism.
Angleton had not been uncomfortable with fascism or fascists at Yale, sometimes to the consternation of his more liberal classmates. Anti-Semitism didn’t seem to bother him. But Pound’s overwrought vehemence did. As his bright college years came to a close in the spring of 1941, Angleton was ready to graduate from Yale College and the school of Ezra Pound. Apparently, they never corresponded again. 39


WIFE


ONE RAINY DAY IN September 1941, Cicely d’Autremont, Vassar class of 1944, walked down Brattle Street in Cambridge. An impish sophomore from Arizona, she was out on a date with a Yale boy who wanted her to meet a friend who had just started at Harvard Law School. Cicely and the boy climbed up three flights of narrow stairs in an old apartment building. They walked into a bare living room that was unfurnished save for a reproduction of El Greco’s painting View of Toledo. A tall man stood next to the picture of an unearthly green landscape.“How do?” he said.
This first encounter so impressed Cicely d’Autremont Angleton that decades later she recalled the moment.
“If anything went together it was him and the picture,” she told a reporter. “I fell madly in love at first sight. I’d never meet anyone like him in my life. He was so charismatic. It was as if the lightning in the picture had suddenly struck me. He had an El Greco face. It was extraordinary.” 40
Another decade after that disclosure, when Cicely Angleton was a grandmother, she again relived that chance encounter, writing a poem tinged with rueful hindsight.


Beware, she warned, of hollow cheeks,

and auras sketched in lightning. 41

Cicely d’Autremont didn’t know to beware of hollow cheeks. She was barely more than a schoolgirl, born into comfort and privilege. The marriage of her mother and father in 1919 joined two of the wealthiest families in Duluth, Minnesota. Her father, Hubert, was a scion of the d’Autremonts, who had vast holdings in mining and lumber. 42 Her mother, Helen, was a Congdon, who had more of the same, in addition to a fabulous mansion. Helen and Hubert moved to Tucson, Arizona, where he became a banker, while she was active in charitable work. During the Depression years, the d’Autremonts were known as the largest contributors to Tucson charities. 43 Cicely was born in 1922, their second child and first daughter. 44
Cicely was drawn to Angleton’s exotic intensity. “Jim was a Chicano and I loved him for it,” she said. “I never saw anyone as Mexican as he was. He was Latino, an Apache, he was a gut fighter.” 45

* * *

ANGLETON DID NOT RETURN Cicely’s passion, at least not immediately.
In his last year at Yale, Angleton’s charmed life had suffered unsettling setbacks. At a time when the U.S. Army was welcoming hundreds of thousands of young men, he was rejected by the Selective Service, probably because of his recurring tuberculosis. 46 Optimistically, he applied to Harvard Law School, despite the fact that his poor grades pulled him down to the bottom quarter of the Yale class of 1941. 47 He was rejected.
Angleton’s friend Norman Holmes Pearson wrote a letter to Harvard, asking them to reconsider. 48 Pearson, then thirty-two years old, surely qualifies as the most improbable spymaster in American history. 49 An assistant literature professor from a prosperous New England family, Pearson had few obvious qualifications for a life of deception and intrigue. He was a genteel man of unobtrusive appearance who walked with a limp, left over from a spinal injury in childhood. He was also a founding spirit of the global enterprise of espionage, propaganda, and violence known as the Central Intelligence Agency.
Pearson’s letter to Harvard proved convincing, and Angleton was admitted. 50 Reprieved from unemployment, Angleton intended to make good by studying international law and contracts and then going into the family business. 51 He was headed for a career of selling cash registers or perhaps publishing poets, but Norman Pearson wasn’t done with him.
Pearson, like many other young Ivy League professors, went to war by joining the newly created Office of Strategic Services. The OSS, as it was known, resembled an elite university in its mission to collect and disseminate information. The OSS was the brainchild of William Donovan, a Wall Street lawyer known as “Wild Bill” for his aerial heroics in World War I. For years, Donovan had been telling his friend Franklin Roosevelt that the rise of Adolf Hitler’s Nazi Germany meant there would be another war in Europe, one that the United States would have to join. America needed a foreign intelligence service, and probably sooner rather than later, he told FDR. After Pearl Harbor, Donovan had won the argument.
The British already had a foreign intelligence agency, the Secret Intelligence Service (SIS), established in 1909, sometimes known as MI6. So the officers of the new American OSS were sent to school at the British intelligence facility in Bletchley Park, north of London. There, Pearson joined the SIS men in teaching the novice Americans the arts of espionage and special operations as perfected by the world’s greatest colonial power.

* * *

IN LAW SCHOOL, ANGLETON learned the consequences of his friendship with Ezra Pound. The poet’s speeches on Radio Rome did not attract a big audience in Italy, nor were they broadcast in the United States. But the Federal Communications Commission in Washington was recording them, 52 and J. Edgar Hoover was listening. In his midfifties, the FBI director was a heavyset man who favored shiny suits. He had built the Bureau of Investigation, a small office within the Justice Department, into a national police force. In April 1942, Hoover ordered his men to investigate Pound on suspicion of aiding America’s enemies. 53
An FBI agent visited Angleton at his Brattle Street flat. Angleton explained he admired Pound’s poetry and found his political theories convincing, though distorted by his prejudices against Jews and bankers. Angleton agreed that Pound’s radio speeches were incoherent and indefensible. He said he would testify to that effect and provide the names of others who knew Pound. 54 In spring 1943, Angleton was drafted into the army and passed his physical exam. He identified himself as James Hugh Angleton, Jr., proof that he did not care for his given middle name, Jesus. 55 Though he could have used his father’s contacts and become an officer, he chose to begin army life as an enlisted man. 56
He also proposed to Cicely, although Hugh and Carmen disapproved. 57 They didn’t know Cicely d’Autremont or her family. Jim didn’t have a job or professional degree. The couple endured a painful meeting with his parents, but the young lovers did not relent. They set a date for a wedding in July near the army base where Angleton was training. On one of Jim’s few days off, he and Cicely got married at a church outside Fort Custer, Michigan, an unromantic beginning to a troubled lifelong commitment. 58

..........

EZRA POUND WAS NOW confined to St. Elizabeths Hospital in southeast Washington. His radio speeches had resulted in an indictment for treason. In the last days of the war, he was arrested by U.S. military police in Rapallo and taken back to the United States for trial. His literary friends persuaded him to plead insanity, and he was committed to the hospital instead of prison.
Angleton still appreciated Pound as an artist but thought he was mad. “Pound probably had the finest ear as far as the English language is concerned,” Angleton told a journalist many years later, “but he never stayed with one style and developed it. He was an innovator, but he had a philosophy
which didn’t really hang together. The fact he called one book Personae, or ‘masks,’ is reflective of his poetry and the different façades that he had. I don’t think anyone ever took Pound’s politics seriously.” 102
Of course, Angleton had taken Pound’s politics seriously, at least as an undergraduate, and he still thought fondly of the man. In drawing up a will in 1948, he would bequeath a “bottle of spirits” to his friend, the incarcerated poet. 103

.......

EZRA POUND WAS RELEASED from St. Elizabeths Hospital in April 1958. He was now seventy-two years old—still a favorite of conservatives but no longer enchanted with fascism. He had finished another book of cantos while incarcerated. Pound’s psychiatrist found him a fascinating thinker and no danger to society.
Although Angleton gave former CIA officer Peter Sichel the impression that he had been in touch with Pound while the poet was at St. Elizabeths, there’s no evidence Angleton ever visited or wrote. 60 After his release, Pound returned to Italy and connected with many old friends, but not with Angleton. 61


Notes:

1. Angleton’s friend John Pauker showed photographs of the naked Pound to classmates, according to Angleton’s biographer Robin Winks. Winks interviewed classmates who had seen the photos.Pauker was friends with Angleton, who had photographed Pound and was the most likely source of the photos. See Robin Winks, Cloak and Gown; Scholars in the Secret War, 1934–1961 (New York: William Morrow, 1988), 334.

2. The sketch appears in Andrews Wanning, “Poetry in an Ivory Tower,” Harkness Hoot, April 1933, 33–39. Wanning was a close friend of Angleton’s.

3. Winks, Cloak and Gown, 329.


5. “2 Idaho Boys Married at Border Camp/H. L. Potter Weds Miss Barbara Clyne of Boise and J. H. Angleton is Joined,” Idaho Daily Statesman, December 19, 1916. The story, repeated by Angleton biographers Tom Mangold, David Martin, and Michael Holzman, that James Hugh Angleton participated in “the punitive expedition” of Gen. “Black Jack” Pershing against Mexican revolutionary Pancho Villa is erroneous, according to historians Charles H. Harris and Louis R. Sadler, authors of The Great Call-Up: The Guard, the Border, and the Mexican Revolution (Norman: University of Oklahoma Press, 2015), 478 n.104.

6. Ada County Assessor Land Records, “2016 Property Details for Parcel R5538912210”; available at 

7. Boise City and Ada County Directory, 1927 (Salt Lake City: R. L. Polk, 1926), p. 49.

8. “James Hugh Angleton Jr, U.S Army Cpl.,” Personnel Files, 1942–1945, box 18, RG 226, National Archives, Washington, D.C.

9. Winks, Cloak and Gown, 330.

10. Bert Macintyre, Spy Among Friends: Kim Philby and the Great Betrayal (New York: Crown, 2014), 69.

11. Letter from James Angleton (JA) to Ezra Pound (EP), August 13, 1938, Ezra Pound Papers, YCAL MSS 43, Series I: Correspondence, box 2, folder 63, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University. Hereafter, EPP.

12. Letter from JA to EP, August 23, 1938, EPP.

13. Letter from JA to EP, January 19, 1939, EPP.

14. That’s what Pound told his friend Mary Barnard. See Mary Barnard, Assault on Mount Helicon: A Literary Memoir (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1984), 161.

15. “The Making of a Master Spy,” Time, February 24, 1975, 2.

16. Reed Whittemore, Against the Grain: The Literary Life of a Poet (Washington, D.C.: Dryad Press, 2007), 38.

17. Michael Holzman, James Jesus Angleton, the CIA, and the Craft of Counterintelligence (Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press, 2007), 12–13.

18. Letter from JA to EP, December 28, 1939, EPP. “He is really going places here at Yale,” Angleton wrote of Mack. He went on to become the chairman of the Yale English Department and a famous critic.

19. Furioso Papers, YCAL MSS 75, Series I: Contributor Correspondence, 1938–1951, box 1, folder 30, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.

20. Letter from EP to JA, January 10, 1939, EPP.

21. Letter from JA to EP, January 19, 1939, EPP.

22. Letter from EP to JA, March 1939, EPP.

23. Letter from JA to EP, March 23, 1939, EPP.

24. Letter from JA to EP, May 3, 1939, EPP. Angleton and Whittemore proved to be demanding editors. Pound sent them another verse, which read as follows:

THE DEATH OF THE PROFESSOR

Is the death of his curiousity. The Professor died the 
moment he ceases hunting for truth, the moment he thinks 
he knows something and starts telling it to the student 
instead of trying to find out what it is. 

This doggerel evidently didn’t meet Angleton and Whittemore’s standards, because they did not publish it. Letter from EP to JA, May 1939, EPP.

25. Furioso Papers, YCAL MSS 75 Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.

26. Holzman, James Jesus Angleton, 25.

27. Author’s interview with William Gowen, September 20, 2015.

28. Draft registration card for James Hugh Angleton, June 5, 1917; available at

30.Winks, Cloak and Gown, 329.

31. Author’s interview with Tom Hughes, August 20, 2015.

32. Letter from JA to E. E. Cummings, August 1939, EPP.

33. E-mail from Nancy Lyon, Yale University archivist, to the author, June 10, 2015.

34. Furioso 1, no. 2 (New Year’s Issue, 1940). Pound’s “Five Poems,” appears on page 5.

35. Letter from JA to EP, December 28, 1939, EPP.

36. Letter from JA to EP, February 1, 1940, EPP.

37. Letter from EP to JA, June 7, 1940, EPP.

38. Letter from EP to James Hugh Angleton, June 19, 1940, EPP.

39. Doob, Leonard, ed., Ezra Pound Speaking: Radio Speeches of WWII, Part II, Miscellaneous Scripts #111, “Homestead”; available at http://www.vho.org/aaargh/fran/livres10/PoundRadiospeeches.pdf.
Their last written communication was a postcard from EP to JA, April 11, 1941, EPP.
(note: the link above was removed, a transcript is available down below)

40. Tom Mangold, Cold Warrior: James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s Master Spy Hunter (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1991), 37.
41. Cicely d’Autremont Angleton, A Cave of Overwhelming: A Collection of Poems (Cabin John, MD: Britain Books, 1995), 25.
42. Walter Van Brunt, Duluth and St. Louis County, Minnesota: Their Story and People, vol. 2, (Chicago: American Historical Society, 1921), 856.
43. “Helen Clara Congdon d’Autremont,” 

44. Birth records, for Cecily Harriet d’Autremont, 
Cicely did not use the spelling of her name that is found on her birth certificate.
45. Mangold, Cold Warrior, 32.
46. Letter from JA to E. E. Cummings, August 16, 1941, bMS AM 1892, Houghton Library, Harvard University. “Reed has gotten into the army and I have been rejected as a weakling but with few regrets,” he wrote.

47. Holzman, James Jesus Angleton, 28.

48. Ibid., 28.

49. Pearson’s story was told first and best in Winks, Cloak and Gown, 247–321.
50. Norman Holmes Pearson Papers, YCAL MSS 899, Letters, box II, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, Yale University.
51. Winks, Cloak and Gown, 340.

52. Doob, “Ezra Pound Speaking,” 6.

53. Holzman, James Jesus Angleton, 29.

54. Ibid., 30.

55. Records of the Office of Strategic Services, Personnel Files, 1942–1945, box 18.

56. Winks, Cloak and Gown, 340.

57. Mangold, Cold Warrior, 37.

58. Ancestry.com. Michigan, Marriage Records, 1867–1952. Provo, UT, USA: Ancestry.com Operations, Inc., 2015. Original data: Michigan, Marriage Records, 1867–1952. Michigan Department of Community Health, Division for Vital Records and Health Statistics.

102. Aaron Latham, “Politics and the C.I.A.—Was Angleton Spooked by State?” New York, March 10, 1975, 34.

103. Mangold, Cold Warrior, 45.


60. Author’s interview with Peter Sichel, December 3, 2015.

61. John Tytell, Ezra Pound: The Solitary Volcano (New York: Anchor Press, 1987), 325–26.


Part II 10 Miscellaneous Scripts #111 (early 1941)


HOMESTEADS

What will remain from this struggle is an idea. What spreads and will spread from the determination to have a New Europe is an idea: the idea of a home for every family in the country. The idea that every family in the country shall have a sane house, and that means a house well built, with no breeding space for tuberculosis bugs. I have seen the details of some of these houses. It means that every family’s house will have land enough, fields enough to support the family. It means that these houses will not be burdened with mortgages. They will be inalienable, and indivisible. The eldest son if he likes, or at any rate one son or daughter will keep the farm, but above all the farmer will be guaranteed a sale for his crop AT A PRICE that will cover his needs. You may have heard that Andy Jackson OPENED the American lands to the settlers. As against John Quincy Adams who had what might be called a more communist idea, not that he was read, but he wanted at least some land reserved to the nation and its proceeds used for schools, and more highfalutin’ branches of education. He was “out of time.” Jackson beat him. Jackson’s policy was a bit sketchy. American homesteads in great part passed into great estates very quickly grazing in place of farms etc , etc. My grandmother and great grandmother lived on claims, land claims. The boys of 20 in New York now know very little of such affairs. My father still has 80 year-old cousins living I take it on claims in Montana They do not represent the majority life of America. But Jackson’s land policy was called DEMocratic. The New Europe is in that sense DEMociatic, and if you folks rush out to SMASH this New Europe history will NOT give you ANY medals whatever for saving DEMocracy. Italy does NOT confiscate the farmers’ crop. I have seen that lie along with 200 others. Italy has not set up Utopia in XIX years, but the farmer here knows he will be paid for what he grows. He knows what he will be paid for it. Nobody will get an option on it and grab excess profits. Get it quite firmly in mind that war mongers are asking you to prevent and smash this idea of a solid and clean well built house with land for each family. Look into it before you decide to go out and die for something or other, without quite knowing what. Let me remind you that Brooks Adams was seen shortly before his death, an old man of 80 in running shorts and sweater, pulling the weights in the gym of the Boston Athletic Club and prophesying a 30 years’ war, an IDEO LOGICAL war. And let me remind you that the notion of ideological wars is FORWARD, not backward. Our American forebears, given an empty continent, sketched in a civilization. Rough draft without very great attention to detail. Settlers rushed onto the land, they had hunger, land hunger, each man to be free: Free of RENT, free of mortgage. Reflection came later. A new idea rises in Europe, it is not confined to the continent. You can not confine it. No amount of postal thieves, censors, examiners, can smash it or swush it. There arises the idea that a man may own all he can use. But that he may not own what he can’t use. And especially he may not use this surplus to starve his neighbor, he may not prevent farmer Jones selling his corn. The millionaire may NOT rush in and undersell Jones till he has ruin’d him, taken a mortgage on Jones’ farm, turned out Jones’ children the day the interest isn’t paid to the full. I will get round in time to the flimflam of a past kind of pacifist, the suppression of news, the gyrations committed by the Carnegie so-called Peace Foundation, their failure to get thought into America. Wars are made to make DEBT. Our Civil War had a relation to DEBT. Christopher Hollis knows this. Readhis book, the TWO NATIONS, debts of the South to the City of NewYork. Greece spends 54% of her income paying the interest on DEBT. Until you know who has lent what TO WHOM, you know nothing whatever of politics, you know nothing whatever of history, you know nothing of international wrangles. I wish Hollis hadn’t taken to silence and solitude just when he did. But on the other hand has ANY man in England now the power to speak out or communicate with his fellows? Little Red Riding Hood, better look out for Wilikie’s false teeth! Is Wendell saving DEMocracy? Is Wendell selling the New Deal to Winston? Or is Wendell trying to shovel a few million farm boys into the trenches? And SO soon after headlines “It’s War OR Willkie”? Is Wendell now for it at all costs; just to prove not having elected him, war is the consequence? Is Mr. ’Opkins selling the New Deal to London? My venerable friend Doctor William C. Williams roars with laughter when I suggest that people might THINK. “Ever see a communist THINK?” writes ole Bill. I been told the process ain’t nacheral. Waal, the Doc. is their white-haired boy. Will even he notice that one group of people has steadily tried to EXtend this conflict and to SUPPRESS all kind of intercommunication between Europe and the U.S.? The other side (my side) has asked [for an] investigation. Now what CAUSES that? Did this war start for Danzig? Did this war start for POland, and if so why such silence re the half of Poland that has been et [eaten] up by Rhooshy? You people don’t believe those sad tales? Or do you? Some people want to make money. Some people want to keep on with a racket that has paid ’em and their papas large dividends. There may be six or eight rackets. Debt interest, gun selling. Is American youth expected to run out and die for debt interest and gun selling? If that is what the war-wanters WANT, let em say so. In England for years it has been KNOWN that the English war plant could NOT produce the goods. Is it to be supposed that a lover of England pushed his country into war, KNOWING that country could NOT produce the goods? It has been declared in England for years that there was a plot on to bash out the WHOLE of Europe for the profit of Russia and the moneyed in America. It now appears that England has been caught in the tweezers of the attempt but that continent largely has NOT French bon sens showed itself at the last minute They declined to have Paris completely coventried in order to hold off the German advance for six days or whatever. The English are not so quick on the uptake. My Hollis has ceased to talk about “the debts of the South to the City of New York being 200 million.” I have been 20 years on this job, but you will not read. The new generation will not read AFTER it has been bombed to blazes or buried by high explosive. It may be your last chance. I suggest that you try to read Hollis’ Two Nations and read pages 206, 207 to learn what the Civil War was ABOUT, who and what caused it. Then you may see who and what is trying to get you yet again into the trenches, and to KEEP British men UNDER fire despite the fact that they did NOT vote for this war. The gombeen men’s idea is that the MORE of England gets smashed, the higher the rate of interest, and the MORE of it, they can change the survivors. What [does] the farmer in West Africa get out of this war? Who now owns THEIR government, for example? If Mr. Hull means to say: I hate the English, I hope there will be in England not one stone left on another. I hope the Stone of Scone will be smashed into powder and made into portland cement. I don’t want ANY life left in Britain. All right, let him express himself. If he means: let’s grab all, positively all the British assets, let him say so, but in that case why dress up as a friend of Britain? And in the meantime let me remind Messrs. Roosevelt and WALLACE of the Report of the National Survey of Potential Product Capacity,published by Hodson, Chairman of the Emergency Relief Bureau and Post, idem, New York Housing Authority in 1935, one of the greatest glories of Mr. Roosevelt’s administration which has also been somewhat neglected both by administration and its opponents. As to the Academy of Social and Political Science, I keep wondering when they will start a serious study of ANYthing whatsoever that is vital to American welfare. A bunch of playboys.

giovedì 19 settembre 2019

The Centenary of the London Gold Fixing Scandal

Rothschild emerges from the shadows for the Centenary of the London Gold Fixing


The Fix is In! – Subduing effects of the Gold Fixings on gold prices 
over nearly 50 years. Source: http://www.goldchartsrus.com

  • “The history of the London Gold Fixing is a history of gold price intervention and manipulation“


    This month in London marks the 100th anniversary of the first “London Gold Fixing”, the infamous daily meeting of a secretive cartel of bullion banks which has met since 1919 to set benchmark gold prices used throughout the international gold market, a meeting which continues to this day through its thinly disguised successor, the LBMA Gold Price auction.

    London gold price benchmarks are critically important to the global gold market because they are used as a valuation source for everything from ISDA gold interest rate swap contracts to gold-backed Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs), and everything from OTC gold contracts to transaction reference prices used by physical bullion dealers when purchasing gold bars and gold coins from refineries and suppliers.

    Since 2015, the London Gold Fixing has been known as the LBMA Gold Price following a rush by the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) bullion banks to patch over the then scandalized  ‘Fixing’ in a smoke and mirrors and circle the wagons relaunch and renaming exercise. The collusive Gold Fixing first formally came into existence on 12 September 1919 when the Bank of England tapped its favorite bankers N.M. Rothschild & Sons to be the daily Fixing’s permanent chairman. Rothschild and the Bank of England had been joined at the hip since the early 1800s and would continue to be so in the Gold Fixing throughout the next century.

    The 1919 launch of the Gold Fixing by the Bank of England and Rothschild succeeded a more informal version of a gold fixing that had existed up to the outbreak of the First World War in 1914, which consisted of a meeting of four London gold brokers Mocatta & Goldsmid, Samuel Montagu, Sharps & Wilkins, and Pixley & Abell who between them set a daily gold price at the offices of Sharps & Wilkins.

    For the next 85 years from its inception in September 1919, the Gold Fixing occurred daily at Rothschild’s headquarters in New Court, St. Swithins Lane, across the road from the Bank of England, with five men from five bullion banks religiously meeting at 10:30 am each morning. After the collapse of the London Gold Pool in 1968, the Gold Fixing moved to a twice per day pricing with an extra 3:00 pm meeting added by the fixers to ‘watch over’ the US morning hours gold market.

    Rothschild would remain as the Gold Fixing’s permanent chairman until May 2004 at which point the fabled investment bank mysteriously departed the gold fixing and stepped back into the shadows after 200 years in the London Gold Market. Until now that is, for in one of its rare re-appearances, the LBMA’s seminar and cocktail reception to celebrate the Gold Fixing’s centenary took place this week at, you guessed it,  NM Rothschilds’ headquarters in St Swithins Lane. In the words of the LBMA, the ‘momentous occasion’ of the centenary celebrations is being:

    “held on the centenary of the first gold price, and held in the current Rothschild building which was built on the site of (the second) New Court, St Swithin’s Lane, where the first gold price was set.  We are grateful to Rothschild & Co for their support in co-hosting this event with LBMA.”
    NM Rothschild’s London headquarters at
    New Court in St Swithin’s Lane, City of London, England
    So is the centenary of the Gold Fixing the ‘momentous occasion’ that the LBMA pitches it as, or is a more realistic perspective needed to counterbalance the
    cheerleading hullabaloo from the LBMA camp?

    Let’s take a look, drawing on some of the many articles on this website and elsewhere that have covered aspects of the infamous gold fixing over the course of its existence, including articles that have looked at more recent LBMA Gold Price. After all, the LBMA Gold Price is just another name for the Gold Fixing, and was conceded as such by the LBMA press office this month when they threw pretense out of the window, saying that: “12 September 2019 marks the centenary of the first London gold price, or what is now known as the LBMA Gold Price.

    The very definition of the centenary as covering 1919 – 2019 underscores the continuity of the “London Gold Fixing – LBMA Gold Price” as one and the same thing, with the LBMA Gold Price just a disguised and more palatable version of the Gold Fixing, a classic case of same old wine in a new bottle, and a pricing process still controlled by the Bank of England and the bullion banks.

    Permanent Fixtures – Rothschild and Bank of England

    So how did the old five gold fixers of Mocatta & Goldsmid, Samuel Montagu, Sharps & Wilkins, Pixley & Abell and of course NM Rothschild end up being the modern day five gold fixers of HSBC, Deustsche Bank, Barclays, Scotia, and SocGen, five banks which were exclusively running the Fixing until the 2014-2015 timeframe? To give a quick recap it was as follows.
    The five former gold fixers in the offices of Rothschild 
    in London where the fixings took place until 2004.
    In 1957, Sharps & Wilkins merged with Pixley & Abell to become Sharps Pixley. In 1966, at the ‘behest of the Bank of England’, the Kleinwort Benson investment bank bought Sharps Pixley. In 1993, Deutsche Bank took over Kleinwort Benson, and in doing so acquired one of the seats at the Gold Fixing.

    In 1957, Mocatta & Goldsmid was acquired by Hambros Bank, who then sold Mocatta to Standard Chartered Bank in 1973. In 1997, Scotiabank bought Mocatta Bullion from Standard Chartered to form ScotiaMocatta. That explains gold fixing seat number two.

    In 1967, Midland Bank took control of Samuel Montagu, and made it a fully owned subsidiary by 1974. In 1992, Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC) fully acquired Midland Bank, and thus acquired the third of the five seats at the Gold Fixing.

    As a major gold refiner, Johnson Matthey (JM) had been involved in the gold fixing from the 1920s but in the early 1960s JM formed Johnson Matthey Bankers Ltd (JMB) which took on one of the seats in the fixing. In 1984, JMB collapsed in one of London’s most memorable financial and gold market scandals and the Bank of England bought JMB, selling it on to Mase Westpac, the gold trading division of Australian bank Westpac. In 1993, Republic National Bank of New York bought Mase Westpac’s fixing seat.

    In 2000, HSBC also acquired Republic National Bank of New York. Since HSBC already had one of the five seats on the Gold Fixing, and Republic also had a seat (from its Mase Westpac purchase), HSBC then had two seats on the fixing, so sold one of these seats to Credit Suisse. In 2002, Credit Suisse sold on this seat to Societe Generale (SocGen). This explains Gold Fixing seat number four.

    And of N.M. Rothschild? Well, in all of this you can see that the only thing permanent about the Gold Fixing throughout most of its history was the most powerful of all investment banks, NM Rothschild, as well as its old friend, the Bank of England operating behind the curtain. However in 2004, Rothschild mysteriously withdrew from the Gold Fixing. Was it a reprimand from the Bank of England for forcing the Bank to “stare into the abyss’ and sell British gold reserves to bail out a market short of physical gold, or was it the characteristic Rothschild habit of retreating into the shadows? Whatever the reason, in 2004 the Bank of England organised for the more pliable Barclays Bank to buy Rothschild’s gold fixing seat.

    Notably, the Rothschild influence lived on with Barclay’s in the Gold Fixing because from 2006 to 2012, if you can believe this and its true, the chairman of Barclays was one Marcus Agius, who is son-in-law of former NM Rothschild chairman, Edmund de Rothschild.

    For Rothschild, acquainted with the number five in the form of the five houses of Rothschild and its five arrows symbolism, the fact that there were only ever five seats on the Gold Fixing, is, to say the least coincidental, and maybe even symbolic. But as to which was the real puppet master in the London Gold Market, Rothschild or the Bank of England, that has always been the question.
    Chaps, the Fix is in – one of the daily gold fixing at Rothschilds in St Swithins

    The Bank of England’s not so hidden hand

    The one constant in the Gold Fixing from its inception, apart from NM Rothschild, is of course the Bank of England, the central bank which controls and has always controlled the London Gold Market. The 1919 version of the fixing, conducted in pounds sterling, was even launched by the Bank of England primarily to sell the gold of seven South African mining houses in London, using Rothschild as its sales agent. In effect, Rothschild muscled in to the market as chairman of the new Fixing and distributed the South African gold through the other bullion brokers.

    During its first six years of existence from1919 to 1925, the Gold Fixing took place in an era of floating exchange rates, with almost all gold going through London being sold through the Gold Fixing by Rothschild, and the gold price fluctuating slightly based on the fixed US dollar price of $20.67 per ounce and sterling / dollar fluctuations. Then when Britain rejoined the Gold Standard in 1925, gold prices in the Fixings stayed in a extremely tight trading range until 1931 with the Bank of England official gold price that it paid to miners acting as a de facto cap on the gold price.

    With Britain off the Gold Standard in 1931, and the US hiking the official gold price to $35 per ounce in 1934, the1931 v- 1939 era saw London gold prices rise slightly, but still under the interventionalist eye of the Bank of England.  The outbreak of World War II in 1939 saw the London gold market and the Gild Fixings close down and stay closed until 1954. When they reopened it was to a world of the Bretton Woods monetary system of an official price of gold fixed at $35 per ounce.

    The 1954 – 1968 period saw countless brazen attempts by the Bank of England and fellow central banks to cap the market price of gold at $35 per ounce, culminating in the infamousLondon Gold Pool, an experiment in gold price intervention from 1961 to 1968 which famously collapsed in March 1968 when the US Treasury ran out of Good Delivery gold bars despite the Bank of England as the Pool’s agent selling thousands of tonnes of gold into the Gold Fixings in late 1967 and early 1968.

    But the the Bank of England had been regularly intervening into the Gold Fixing even before the London Gold Pool, to exercise what it aloofly called a ‘moderating influence’ on the gold price. This is starkly illustrated in the following passage from a Bank of England’s Quarterly Bulletin in 1964 in which it wrote (page 16):

    The Bank of England are not physically represented at the fixing. But they are able, like any other operator, effectively to participate in the fixing by passing orders by telephone through their bullion broker and at the fixing they use exclusively the services of the chairman of the market, namely, Rothschilds.
    …, the Bank aim, as in the case of the foreign exchange and gilt-edged markets, to exercise, so far as they are able, a moderating influence on the market, in order to avoid violent and unnecessary movements in the price and thus to assist the market in the carrying on of its business.”

    After the London Gold Pool collapsed in March 1968, the gold market reopened after two weeks using a two tier approach of an official gold price pegged at $35 per ounce for central banks, and a supposedly ‘free market’ gold price for everyone else. Notably, upon reopening, the daily Gold Fixing of Rothschild and friends switched to being priced in US dollars, and an afternoon fixing meeting was added 3:00 pm so as to allow the Bank of England and the five fixers to exert more control over morning trading hours in New York.

    If you think that the Bank of England bowed out of thinking about ways to manipulate the gold price in 1968, then you would be mistaken. On the contrary, it continued to scheme behind closed doors and in secretive ways right up to the modern era, including discussions with other G10 central bank governors at the Bank of International Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland in 1979 and 1980 about forming a new interventionist gold pool to  “break the psychology of the market“ and hold the gold price at a critical time holding it within a target area“ (see “New Gold Pool at the BIS - BASLE, Switzerland - Part 1” and “New Gold Pool at the BIS - BASLE Part 2 - Pool vs. Gold for Oil”).

    The Bank of England also devised the London gold lending market, a top secretive and opaque market that emerged on the 1980s in which central banks lend out their gold via LBMA bullion banks, the lent gold positions of which are sold into the market and have a subduing effect on the price. Ask the LBMA and Bank of England for data on outstanding gold loans or the size of the lending market and you will not get an answer. The Bank of England also allowed the development unallocated gold position trading in London, a vast ponzi of paper gold positions (mere credit in the form of bullion bank promises) that have little or no backing of real gold, but whose trading still perversely is hugely influential ingold price discovery.

    This is illustrated by the astounding case of the head of the Bank of England’s foreign exchange and gold Terry Smeeton intervening into the Gold Fixing during the 1980s: “Terry’s gold activities, often partly aimed at helping the London Market’s daily gold fixes, produced an overall profit. To see exactly what this refers to, please see “The Bank of England and the London Gold Fixings in the 1980s.

    For anyone with doubts about how the London Gold Fixings have suppressed gold prices over time, take a look at the following chart from Nick Laird’s
    http://www.goldchartsrus.com/ website which shows three price lines of gold prices from 1970 when the price was $35 per troy ounce to 2019. In red is the actual US dollar gold price, in blue is the theoretical gold price if you bought at the afternoon London gold fix and held overnight and sold at the next day’s morning gold fix, in black is a theoretical gold price if you bought at the morning gold fix and sold same day at the afternoon gold fix.

     The Fix is In! – Subduing effects of the Gold Fixings on gold prices over nearly 50 years.

    Starting in 1970 when the price of gold was $35 per ounce, if every day you bought at the price of the afternoon Gold Fixing and sold 19.5 hours later at the price of the next day’s morning Gold Fixing price, your $35 would now be worth $15,843. That’s the cumulative value of the Overnight strategy. On the other hand if every trading day since 1970 you bought at the morning Gold Fixing price and sold 4.5 hours later at the afternoon Gold Fixing price, your $35 would now be worth, wait for it, just $3.33. That’s the cumulative value of the Intraday strategy. The key point is the the London Gold Fixings suppress the gold price intraday and that the current gold price of around $1500 is far lower than it should be because of the prices in these Gold Fixes. None of which is mentioned by the LBMA in its commentaries of the 100th anniversary of the Gold Fixing this month in London.


    The London Gold Market Fixing Limited

    Also not mentioned by the LBMA in its centenary celebrations this month is the fact that the incredibly named The London Gold Market Fixing Limited (LGMFL), a private company comprising the five member banks of the Gold Fixing (Barclays bank Plc, HSBC Bank USA, The Bank of Nova Scotia, Deutsche Bank and Societe Generale), is still an active company on the UK Companies House register. Incorporated in January 1994, the company’s accounts are still prepared on a going concern basis and the company can’t be wound up because it is currently being sued in New York courts by class actions suits accusing LGMFL of involvement in gold price manipulation.


    For example, the latest activity on the company register, just filed on 4 September 2019, shows the recentappointment of SocGen’s Francois Combes as a LGMFL director on 30 August 2019 , the termination of SocGen’s Vincent Domien, as a LGMFL director on the same date, and the termination of Scotia’s Steven Lowe in August 2018.

    In addition to SocGen’s Francois Combes, other current directors of LGMFL areSimon Weeks of Scotia, Xavier Lannegrace of SocGen,  Paul Voller of HSBC, and Jerzy Burmicz of Barclays. Deutsche Bank has successfully extracted itself from the LGMFL at this time. Recent filings also show the latest annual accounts for The London Gold Market Fixing Limited to December 2018, with a critical commentary that:


    The London Gold Market Fixing Limited four member banks have been named as defendants in class action lawsuits pending in the United States Federal Court for the Southern District of New York, the first of which was filed on 3 March 2014 in connection with their roles in setting the London benchmark gold price. The complaints allege among other things that The London Gold Market Fixing Limited and its member banks collectively violated provisions of the Sherman Act, the Commodity Exchange Act, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) rule 180.1 (a) and various state laws by manipulating the London benchmark gold price.

    The US class actions being referred to by the London Gold Market Fixing Limited above were covered in posts on the BullionStar website such as Spoofing Futures and Banging Fixes: Same Banks, Same Trading Desksand in the detailed and ground-breaking analysis of the class action court papers by Allan Flynn on his blog site here.

    And its not only in New York where investors think they have been the victims of gold market fraud. Investor groups are also using Canadian courts to pursue class actions against The London Gold Market Fixing Limited and the five gold fixing banks using the Ontario Superior Court. The above LGMFL accounts state that the Canadian class actions say that:

    London Gold Market Fixing Limited and the member banks conspired, agreed and / or arranged with each other to manipulate the London benchmark gold price, and seek damages of Can$ 1 billion under the Competition Act and for civil conspiracy, unjust enrichment and waiver of tort.”

    See here and here for more details. Missing from the LBMA’s momentous occasion centenary update on 12 September were any references to The London Gold Market Fixing Limited still being a very much live and active company, or the fact that London Gold Market Fixing Limited and four of the five fixers are currently defendants in class action suits in New York and Canada.
     
    Its also interesting that a majority of the five gold price fixers of London Gold Market Fixing Limited have now exited the entire precious metals markets in London. This includes Deutsche Bank, Barclays, and more recently SocGen. Another member of the cartel, Scotia Mocatta, tried but failed to sell its precious metals business but did execute a reorganization of that business. That just leaves HSBC still fully active in the London Gold Market As explained in “Curse of the London Gold Fix strikes again as SocGen abandons ship“:

    “The casualties of the still active London Gold Market Fixing Limited are now looking so severe that the entire former gold fixing cesspit looks cursed. So is it just a matter of time before the fifth member of the infamous syndicate, HSBC, runs into some type of trouble?”

    GoldFixing Website hurriedly ‘pulled’

    This London Gold Market Fixing Limited is the same company that Bloomberg drew attention to in ts article titled “London Gold Fix Calls Draw Scrutiny Amid Heavy Trading” in November 2013 saying that:

    “London Gold Market Fixing Ltd., a company controlled by the five banks that administers the benchmark, has no permanent employees. A call from Bloomberg News was referred to Douglas Beadle, 68, a former Rothschild banker, who acts as a consultant to the company … Beadle declined to comment on the benchmark-setting process.”
    The LBMA also failed to mention in its speeches this week the real reasons why the entire Gold Fixing was ‘pulled’ in March 2015. As background, the last ever ‘Gold Fixing’ took place on the afternoon of Thursday 19 March 2015 at 3.00 pm. Following that, the www.goldfixing.com website of The London Gold Market Fixing Limited was permanently switched off on 23 March 2015 and the server taken off line, a fact confirmed the previous week by the same Douglas Beadle, former Rothschild banker. See “London Gold Fixing website www.goldfixing.com taken offline” for details, and for links to all the original documents which were on the old www.goldfixing.com website before it was hurriedly taken down.

    ‘The best thing to do was to pull it’

    But what led to the Gold Fixing being pulled in 2015 (while being replaced with practically the same thing with a new name)? The unraveling of the London Gold Fixing arguably began in late 2013 in the wake of the LIBOR scandal when financial regulatory authorities such as the UK FCA and Germany’s BaFin began
    investigating the Gold Fixing and scrutinizing the five gold fixing banks. Germany’s financial regulator BaFin appeared particularly efficient in its investigation into Deutsche Bank’s gold fixing activities, and whatever was in the documents that BAFI demanded from Deutsche in late 2013 caused Deutsche Bank torun for the exits of the London gold and silver market in January 2014 and abandon both its Gold Fixing and Silver Fixing seats.
    Unable to sell either its Gold Fixing or Silver Fixing seat, as no other banks would touch the fixings given the regulatory investigations, Deutsche Bank gave just two weeks notice and walked away on 13 May 2014, leaving four banks on the Gold Fixing (Barclays, Scotia, HSBC and SocGen), and only two banks on the Silver Fixing (Scotia and HSBC).

    This then opened the flood gates for the rest of the fixers to abandon ship, but not before all 10 directors of the London Gold Market Fixing Company at that time were profiled on 15 May 2014 in ZeroHedge’s excellent article “From Rothschild to Koch's Industries, Meet the People who Fix the Price of Gold”, The names of these directors were Matthew Keen and James Vorley of Deutsche Bank, Simon Weeks and Steven Lowe or Scotia, Jonathan Spall and Martyn Whitehead of Barclays, Peter Drabwell and David Rose of HSBC, and Vincent Domien and Xavier Lannegrace of SocGen.

    Less than a week later on 20 May 2014, Baclays then announced that its Head Of Gold Trading Marc Booker was leaving the bank. Then three days later on 23 May 2014, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the UK’s financial regulator, announced that Daniel Plunkett, a director on the Barclays precious metals desk in London and a colleague of Booker, Spall and Whitehead on the trading floor in Canary Wharf, had been charged of manipulating the gold price of the afternoon Gold Fixing, and was being levied with a financial penalty and prohibition from trading. This is the same Daniel Plunkett who became infamous for his “I Am Hoping For A Mini Puke” statement, the mini puke being a lower gold price.

    At the same time the FCA fined Barclays Bank Plc (Barclays) £26,033,500 for

    failing to adequately manage conflicts of interest between itself and its customers as well as systems and controls failings, in relation to the Gold Fixing. These failures continued from 2004 to 2013.

    Yes, you have read that correctly. Barclays was fined for manipulating the price of gold for a decade from 2004 to 2013, i.e. the entire time that Barclays was in on the fixing. The year 2004 is also interesting because from 2004 onwards the five fixers were no longer meeting face to face each day but meeting remotely using a web based application and electronic chat apps. See the article “The pre-2015 London Gold Fixing - More technologically advanced than reported” for details. These networked and chat apps would make collusion a lot easier but would also leave a trail of evidence.
    .

    It’s all the Same, only the Names will change

    It is beyond the scope of this article to look at how the LBMA locked down and controlled the move from the London Gold Fixing to the LBMA Gold Price, and is still acting preventing real representative participation in the global gold price discovery process. That will be left for future analysis. For those interested in the background and modus operandi for choosing the ‘new’ version of the gold fixing, a selection of relevant articles includes “Chinese Banks as direct participants in the new LBMA Gold and Silver Price auctions? Not so fast!“, “Six months on ICE – The LBMA Gold Price, “LBMA Alchemy and the London Gold and Silver Markets: 2 Steps Back” and “The LBMA Silver Price – Broken Promises on Wider Participation and Central Clearing."




    Suffice to say, a full two thirds of the fifteen participants in the LBMA Gold Price auction are bullion banks, including the likes of Goldman Sachs, HSBC, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, and the Bank of Nova Scotia.
    Bank of England, a moderating influence on the gold price

    Conclusion

    For those who happen to be in London later this month on 27 September and want to see the LBMA and Bank of England’s take on the 100th anniversary of the Gold Fixing, there is a ‘Good Talk‘ being jointly presented by LBMA CEO Ruth Crowell,  and LBMA Chairman Paul Fisher in an event at the Bank of England. ‘Independent’ LBMA Chairman Paul Fisher will be no stranger to the location as he was a career long at the very same Bank of England including Head of Foreign Exchange (which includes gold). See “Blood Brothers: The Bank of England and the London Bullion Market Association (LBMA)” for details. As Jim Rickards observed when Fisher was appointed LBMA chairman back in 2016:

    Banks pick central banker to head market. Like putting an oil exec in charge of Tesla: http://bloom.bg/29QfHZ4





    As the great and the good of the London Gold Market raise a toast to the centenary of the Gold Fixing this September, while lauding the ‘new’ LBMA Gold Price, it would be well to keep in mind the old phrase ‘you can put lipstick on a pig, but its still a pig’.

    The LBMA recently asserted that “it took 89 years for the gold price to break through the $1,000 barrier, reaching a new all-time high of $1,023.50 on 17 March 2008“, to which we have the question what would the gold price be now in the absence of the London Gold Fixings and the LBMA Gold Price?

    Post in evidenza

    The Great Taking - The Movie

    David Webb exposes the system Central Bankers have in place to take everything from everyone Webb takes us on a 50-year journey of how the C...