US Supreme Court to ruleon ownership of Guelph treasure
Credit: Tobias Schwarz/AFP
The ownership of a trove of religious art worth nearly a quarter of a billion dollars (£186 million) which was acquired by the Nazis in 1935 will be considered by the US Supreme Court on Monday.
At the centre of the dispute are 42 items, forming part of the Guelph Treasure, which has been on display at the Berlin Museum of Decorative Arts since 1963.
They were part of an 82-piece collection acquired by a quartet of Jewish art dealers in 1929. In 1935 the 42 items were sold to a German museum for 4.25 million Reichsmarks (£14.9 million).
The objects include a crystal-encrusted cross and bone fragments, said to be from saints, which were brought back from the crusades.
Descendants of two of the dealers claim the consortium was forced to sell the items at a knockdown price as the Nazis systematically stripped Jews of their property.
US Supreme Court to rule on ownership of Guelph Treasure
Credit: Tobias Schwarz/AFP
Their lawyer, Nicholas O’Donnell, said the transaction was a violation of international law because it took place during the Holocaust which, he argues, started when Hitler came to power.
However, this is disputed by the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation, which says the deal represented a fair market price.
The foundation said its research showed that the dealers had tried to sell the items in the US but were unable to get a satisfactory offer at a time when the global economy was reeling from the 1929 financial crash.
In July Hermann Parzinger, the president of the foundation, told the New York Times that it had returned hundreds of pieces of art which had been looted by the Nazis.
“There are those who say that everything that changed hands after Jan. 30, 1933, was confiscated under duress,” he said. “But we think that each case needs to be investigated.”
US Supreme Court to rule on ownership of Guelph Treasure
Credit: Tobias Schwarz/AFP
This deal, however, was not forced, he argued. “We believe that the final sale price was appropriate."
This view was shared by a Germain arbitration commission in 2014. It ruled that the collection was acquired legitimately and there was no case for its being returned to the descendants of the original owners.
Two lower US courts have ruled in favour of the dealers’ descendants, which prompted the Foundation to take the case to the Supreme Court.
Underpinning the dispute is the issue of whether the US courts should even consider the case, given that it involves a transaction which took place in Germany.
Finding for the dealers’ descendants, Jonathan Freiman, the Foundation’s lawyer told the Guardian, would lead to a wave of art restitution cases being fought out in America.
“The US has for a long time relied on countries taking care of their own legal affairs, or disputes being settled through efficient international mechanisms. This ruling could change that."
Свежие комментарии