This morning's front page of "The Independent" (London) reports the action
being taken by the National Gallery to research again the provenance of
more than a quarter of its post-1933 acquisitions (120 paintings) of which
there is some uncertainty about the provenance.
This is, of course, following exactly the recommendation ICOM
recommendation of December 1998.
The full piece is reproduced below courtesy of the Independent's web site
(www.independent.co.uk).
The argument in the second paragraph that "In law we can't transfer title"
refers to provisions in the UK's National Gallery and British Museum Acts.
However, this seems to be based on a fallacy: the laws certainly prohibit
disposals or transfers (except under very tightly restricted conditions -
e.g. decay or deterioration beyond restoration).
However, the Acts plainly cannot apply in the case of items where the
museum has not acquired a valid title in the first place, e.g. because the
work of art or whatever was stolen. To claim that putting a National
Gallery registration number on a stolen or looted work of art
automatically makes it the museum's inalienable property in perpetuity
implies that the National Gallery and British Museum Acts give the
trustees what amounts to a power of nationalisation of private property.
There is no way that such an interpretation could be read into the
Acts. If after due investigation (most probably through the British
courts) it is held that the National Gallery does not have a valid title
to a painting then plainly the National Gallery Acts will not apply.
Patrick Boylan
======================================
[THE INDEPENDENT, LONDON, 2 MARCH 1999, PAGE 1]
[UK NEWS]
[Image]
'Looted Nazi art' in National Gallery
By David Lister, Arts News Editor
The National Gallery is to study the
histories of more than 100 of its
paintings amid fears that they could
have been looted by the Nazis. The
suspect works include paintings by
Picasso, Renoir, Redon, Degas, Van Dyck
and Caravaggio.
The National Gallery will be the first
gallery or museum in the world to go
through its collection to root out
paintings with Nazi links. However its
director, Neil MacGregor, said
yesterday that even if any of the
paintings were found to have been
looted by the Nazis, they could not be
returned to their rightful owners. He
said: "In law we can't transfer title.
So we can't give a painting back to an
individual but the individual might
want compensation."
The decision to investigate any
painting whose provenance is unclear is
the first step by British galleries to
determinewhether any works might have
been looted from Jewish families. Other
galleries, including the Tate, the
British Museum and leading regional
galleriesare drawing up plans to sift
through their collections.
Mr MacGregor said yesterday he thought
it unlikely that many, if any, of the
paintings would turn out to have been
in Nazi hands. But after the "Nazi
Gold" revelations of money looted from
Jewish families, it was felt necessary
to remove any doubt. He added: "Of the
2,400 paintings in the National
Gallery, 470 have been acquired since
1933 and there are 120 where we can't
be certain about their provenance.
"We are doing this so anyone who might
have a claim can see what is in the
National Gallery. But we should keep a
sense of proportion; my hunch is
thatonly very few works will turn out
to be open to dispute."
On the 120-strong list are such works
as Woman Drying Herself by Degas;
Ophelia Among the Flowers by Redon and
Picasso's Fruit, Dish, Bottle and
Violin.
The change in attitude to the Nazi
period over the past couple of years is
illustrated by the example of
Bosschaert's Flowers in a Vase,
acquired by the National Gallery five
years ago.
Its annual report from the time merely
said that the picture had been bought
in Switzerland "shortly after the
Second World War".
|
