More information, for those who wanted it...
 
For the record, the event has already occurred (the object was sold)- so the point is now moot, but we are revisiting the scenario because we are doing another similar auction and the situation (or something similar) may occurr.  It was handled poorly in the first place (legal and ethical issues aside) and created a PR nightmare, and I want to develop a policy/procedure for this type of situation before it happens again.
 
The situation was that a first edition book (c. 1930) by a local author was donated to the museum unconditionally (meaning, according to the donation form, that we could either keep it or sell it to benefit the museum).  The decision was made by the then director that the book should be put into the silent auction at the annual fundraiser.  This was controversial because we do not have an original or autographed copy of that book in the collection, and the collections staff argued that it should be considered for the collection first.  The Board supported the director under the assumption that the book would bring a lot of revenue, which we desperately needed at the time.  *However* the book ended up selling for about $20 (less than the edition that we sell in our store), which horked off everyone involved, including the donor (who was present at the auction).  There was talk of the donor trying to withdraw the donation, or trying to pull the item from the auction, which just made matters worse.  In the end, the book was handed over to the winner of the auction and we don't know what happened to it.
 
It is my belief that the item *should* have been considered first for the collection, even though there was no legal or ethical responsibility to do so.  I think that would have been the right thing to do.  I am wondering whether (before we have another auction) we should write into our collections policy (and include on our donation forms) that all donated objects should/will be considered for the collection first, unless the donor specifically states another use.  Some of the board/ staff members agree with this, others do not want the use of unconditional gifts restricted in any way (they see the problem more as a matter of what the book sold for than the procedure that led to the sale).
Does that change anyone's opinion?
On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 9:49 AM, Joel Williams <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
If the person donating the object is doing it explicity for the raising of funds, I don't see what right the museum has in keeping it. Offer to buy it, sure, but I'd argue it'd be unethical to do something other than what the donor intended.


On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 10:43 AM, Carol Ely <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

I don’t have a source to cite, but here at Locust Grove we run an annual used book sale which has accepted donations of some quite valuable books. A professional book appraiser donates his services to us. When we see a book that is appropriate for in-house use, we move it either to the library, in the case of a book that is useful for reference, or offer it to the Acquisitions/Collections Committee for consideration, if it is suitable for display (a book that is old enough and of a subject matter that it could conceivably once been in the possession of household members).

 

I don’t know about illegal or unethical, but it’s not a good idea to turn down a free mission-related addition to your collection for simple revenue. Although I suppose that’s the position that many museums are in now, fortunately we are not in that position.

 

Carol Ely

Historic Locust Grove

Louisville

 

From: Museum discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cass Karl
Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 9:34 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Settle an argument (ethics/ legal question)

 

Hello listers!

 

I am hoping that someone on the list can settle an argument between myself and a colleague...

 

If an institution sells (say in a fundraising auction) an antique item (say an autographed 1st ed. book)  that was donated for the sale, but would really be more appropriately kept for the collection, is that a) illegal, b) unethical, c) neither of these, but still just not a good idea?  Please cite a source to support your position if you can.

 

Thanks!

 

-Casandra Karl

Executive Director

Mission Historical Museum

Mission, TX

 

To unsubscribe from the MUSEUM-L list, click the following link:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MUSEUM-L&A=1


To unsubscribe from the MUSEUM-L list, click the following link:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MUSEUM-L&A=1



To unsubscribe from the MUSEUM-L list, click the following link:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MUSEUM-L&A=1



To unsubscribe from the MUSEUM-L list, click the following link:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=MUSEUM-L&A=1