Jewish heirs sue Germany in US over medieval art treasure

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP

BY KIRSTEN GRIESHABER

BERLIN (AP) -- The heirs of Nazi-era Jewish art dealers say they have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. suing Germany and a German museum for the return of a medieval treasure trove worth an estimated $226 million.

The suit, which attorneys said was filed late Monday in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., is the latest salvo in a long-running campaign by the heirs for return of the so-called Welfenschatz, or Guelph Treasure - which they claim their ancestors sold under Nazi pressure.

Originally collected over centuries by the Braunschweig Cathedral, the Welfenschatz includes some of the outstanding goldsmith works of the Middle Ages, among them ornate containers in the form of cathedrals used to store Christian relics. Many of the silver and gold pieces are decorated with jewels and pearls. Some are more than 800 years old.

Attorney Nicholas O'Donnell told The Associated Press in an interview in Berlin that the suit asks the Washington court to declare an American and a British descendant of a consortium that owned the collection in 1935 - when it was sold to the German state of Prussia - the rightful owners today.

FULL story at link.



FILE - In this Jan. 9, 2014 filr photo the medieval Dome Reliquary (13th century) of the Welfenschatz, is displayed at the Bode Museum in Berlin. The heirs of Nazi-era Jewish art dealers said they have filed a lawsuit in the U.S. suing Germany and a German museum for the return of a medieval treasure trove worth an estimated US$ 226 million. The suit, which attorneys said was filed late Monday, Feb 23, 2015 in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., is the latest salvo in a long running campaign by the heirs for return of the so-called Welfenschatz, or Guelph Treasure _ which they claim their ancestors sold under Nazi pressure. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/E/EU_GERMANY_DISPUTED_ART?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[Demeter]

1. Seems to me that art belongs in a public museum

Pay the dealers and complete the "purchase"

[happyslug]

2. Economic duress is NOT duress under US Law.

This was sold in 1935. The Holocaust only started in 1942. The Nuremberg laws were passed in 1935, but those laws stripped Jews of German Citizenship and other restrictions (including marrying a non-jew) and had economic restrictions (including where someone could work) but no killing of jews per se:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Laws

Actual hostilities to jews increased after 1933, but did NOT become overt till Kristallnacht was in 1938:

http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007697

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht

Thus when these objects were sold, discrimination against jews was legal, but doing them harm was not (It would be a few years later, but NOT in 1935, but such acts of violence was increasing from 1933 onward).

Under US Laws, ECONOMIC DURESS is NOT DURESS, i.e. if you sell something because you needed the money because you are being persecuted by NOT being hired by anyone, that is economic duress and is legal and the sale is final. On the other hand if someone say sell this to me or I am going to break your legs, that is duress and any such sale is void.

Thus was the items sold in 1935 do to ECONOMIC Duress, i.e. the family needed the money to live for no one was offering any work for pay ("no one will hire you unless you sell those items to the state of Prussia&quot or physical threats, "Your house will be fire bombed unless you sell those items to me&quot . The problem is that in 1935 the Nazis were still using mostly economic pressures on jews to move out and sell items to pay for the move, NOT physical threats like Kristallnacht (Which was in 1938) and economic duress is NOT duress and thus the contract to sell the items are valid on their face.

Just wanted to state the US and German government's position, these items were sold at a fair value in 1935. If the owners were under any types of duress to sell the items, it was economic not physical duress and as economic duress is NOT duress under the law, the sale was valid and final and the heirs have no claim to any of the items or any additional money for their value.

[Xithras]

3. Agreed. I normally agree with Jewish WW2 claims, but not this one.

The collection wasn't even in Germany when it was sold, there is no evidence of any kind of force or persecution that drove the sale, and the collectors were paid a full and fair market value. The descendants entire argument seems to be, "My ancestors sold to the Nazis, so I should be able to invalidate the sale on those grounds alone." Just as importantly, the claim has already been evaluated by the commission in charge of handing out restitution and returning stolen items, and they found their claims to be groundless. Filing the request in an American court is simply an attempt to do an end run on the European system.

These are medieval European Christian religious pieces that are in a public museum today where all Europeans can view and enjoy them. The descendants are attempting to pull them out of the museum and place them into their private American collections to increase their personal wealth. I can't support that.

[closeupready]

4. Yeah, I'm not convinced this claim is valid.