[CPProt.net] Netherlands: RESTITUTIONS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS RESTITUTION OF FIVE ARTWORKS

[Museum Security Network / Cultural Property Protection Net (Ton Cremers)]

PRESS RELEASE 


The Hague, April 11, 2005


RESTITUTIONS COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS RESTITUTION OF FIVE ARTWORKS

THE HAGUE – The Restitutions Committee recommends that State Secretary for
Education, Culture and Science, Van der Laan restitute five works from the
Netherlands Art Property Collection to the grandsons of the original Jewish
owner of an art dealership from Amsterdam. After sixteen recommendations
concerning restitution claims from private individuals, this is the first
recommendation by the committee concerning the restitution of artworks which
were part of the trading stock of an art dealership. Since the close of the
1940s the works have been part of the Netherlands Art Property Collection
which is in the state’s custody.

The Jewish art dealer, whose heirs submitted the request for restitution,
closed his gallery in Amsterdam due to the impending war in 1939. He sent
part of his trading stock to the United States and Great Britain, another
part was stored in a warehouse in Amsterdam. At the behest of the occupying
forces the business was reopened in 1941 and the works stored in Amsterdam
were moved back to the premises. In February 1942 however, the occupying
forces appointed so-called Verwalters for a number of months, who managed
the art dealership instead of the owner. In November 1942, the occupying
forces sold the art dealership to a Dutch businessman. This entrepreneur
paid the purchase price to a German looting organisation with a loan which
was repaid afterwards with money taken from the art dealership. After the
war, the original owner received 68% of this purchase price. The discussion
he had after the liberation with the Netherlands Art Property Foundation
about the restitution of artworks which originally belonged to his art
dealership and had been recuperated by then from Germany, did not in all
cases result in their return. 

The current claim concerns nine works of art. After examining the facts, the
Restitutions Committee concluded that no positive recommendation could be
provided to the State Secretary for the restitution of four of the works.
Two paintings were auctioned off by the art dealership in 1944 when it had
already been sold. No clues could be found for those paintings which
supported the possibility that they had been purchased by the art
dealership’s original owner. For every claim, the committee uses the
criterion that the ownership of the artworks must have been involuntarily
relinquished due to circumstances directly related to the Nazi regime. The
two paintings were most probably purchased and sold by the art dealership’s
new owner. This therefore does not constitute involuntary loss of property
by the original owner. 
Two other paintings were sold by the owner of the art dealership to Dutch
purchasers shortly after the occupation started. As an art dealership’s
objective is to sell its trading stock, the Restitutions Committee is of the
opinion that the sale of an artwork after the occupation by the art dealer
himself to a Dutch citizen, was a voluntary transaction. For this reason,
these artworks do not qualiry for restitution. 
The committee does recommend the restitution of a painting sold to the
German Alois Miedl in October 1940 by the art dealer himself. Miedl had
purchased Jacques Goudstikker’s Amsterdam art dealership in July 1940 and
continued the art trade, using Goudstikker’s name. Miedl benefited from the
war through massive profits made trading with the Germans, whereby he made
particular efforts for the art collections of his friend Göring and Hitler.
Owing to Miedl’s dubious reputation it cannot be ruled out that the sale to
him took place involuntarily. Although Miedl helped Jewish families during
the Second World War and was himself married to a Jewish woman, he was
clearly also pro-Nazi. In the committee’s opinion it can no longer be
ascertained whether this concerned voluntary sale or not. The lack of
further evidence so many years later is the government’s risk. 

The Restitutions Committee also recommends the restitution of four works of
art of which it can no longer be ascertained whether they were voluntarily
sold by the owner of the art dealership himself. The buyers were all Germans
(particularly museums). Here too, the lack of further evidence is the
government’s risk.

Since its founding in January 2002, 28 cases have been submitted to the
Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items
of Cultural Value and the Second World War, otherwise known as the
Restitutions Committee, and it has issued recommendations for 17 of these
cases.

Further information:
For further information please contact Nicole Hagemans,
interim-secretary/monitor of the Restitutions Committee on Tel.:
+31(0)703765993. 
For information on the State Secretary’s decision please contact Ilie
Trienekens, Information Dept. of the Ministry of Education, Culture and
Science on Tel.: +31(0)704122860.
The complete text of the recommendations for this case can be found on our
website: www.Restitutions Committee.nl, which also provides general
information on the Restitutions Committee.