The Hungarian Crown Jewels. Left, the scepter. Center, the celebrated Crown of St. Stephen. Right, the sword. These priceless treasures fell into the hands of the American authorities in Germany at the war’s close.
View of the Treasure Room at the Central Collecting Point, Wiesbaden, showing treasures stolen from Polish churches.
The celebrated Egyptian sculpture, Queen Nefertete, formerly in the Berlin Museum, discovered in the Merkers salt mine.
A few days after our visit to Wiesbaden with Colonel Kluss, I received a letter from home enclosing a clipping from the December 7 edition of the New York Times. The clipping read as follows:
$80,000,000 PAINTINGS ARRIVE FROM EUROPE ON ARMY TRANSPORT
A valuable store of art, said to consist entirely of paintings worth upward of $80,000,000, arrived here last night from Europe in the holds of the Army transport James Parker.
Where the paintings came from and where they are going was a mystery, and no Army officer on the pier at Forty-fourth Street and North River, where the Parker docked with 2,483 service passengers, would discuss the shipment, or even admit it was on board. It was learned elsewhere that a special detail of Army officers was on the ship during the night to take charge of the consignment, which will be unloaded today.
Unusual precautions were taken to keep the arrival of the paintings secret. The canvases were included in more than forty crates and were left untouched during the night under lock and key.
Presumably the shipment was gathered at sites in Europe where priceless stores of paintings and art objects stolen by the Nazis from the countries they overran were discovered when Allied forces broke through into Germany and the dominated countries.
The White House announced in Washington two months ago that shipments of art would be brought here for safekeeping, to be kept in “trust” for the rightful owners, and the National Gallery of Art, through its chairman, Chief Justice Harlan Fiske Stone, was asked to provide storage and protection for the works while they are in this country. The gallery is equipped with controlled ventilation and expert personnel for the storage and handling of such works.
The White House announcement gave no listing of the paintings, but it is known that among the vast stores seized, including caches in Italy as well as Germany, and Hermann Goering’s famous $200,000,000 art collection, [were] included many of the world’s art treasures and works of the masters.
By coincidence, I received that same day a copy of the New York Times Overseas Weekly edition of December 9, which carried substantially the same story, except for the fact that it stated unequivocally that the paintings shipped to America were Nazi loot.
Edith and I were gravely disturbed by the inaccuracy of the statements in these articles. Our concern was increased by the fact that the articles had appeared in so reliable a publication as the Times. What could have happened to the official press release on the subject issued on the twenty-fourth of November when the James Parker was ready to sail?[5] And why all the mystery? I reread the December 7 clipping. To me there was the implication that we were shipping loot in wholesale lots to the United States. That would be alarming news to the countries whose stolen art works we were already returning as rapidly as possible.
The Times story most emphatically called for a correction. But if a statement from our office were sent through channels, it probably wouldn’t reach New York before Easter. Edith looked up from her work. There was a glint in her eye. She asked, “Will you do me a favor? I’d like to write the letter of correction.”
I told her to go ahead. Ten minutes later she showed me the rough draft. It covered all the points. I reworked a phrase here and there but made no important changes and, as soon as it was typed and cleared, I signed and mailed it. As published in the New York Times two weeks later, on January 2, 1946, the letter read as follows:
TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEW YORK TIMES
On Dec. 7 The Times printed a report to the effect that $80,000,000 worth of paintings, presumably from the stores of art objects stolen by the Nazis, had arrived from Europe in the Army transport James Parker. Your Overseas Weekly edition of Dec. 9 repeated this information but stated categorically that the paintings were Nazi loot.
It is true that the James Parker brought to America some 200 paintings of inestimable value, but none of them is loot or of dubious ownership. They are the property of the Kaiser Friedrich Museum in Berlin. A press release from the Office of Military Government for Germany (U.S.), dated Nov. 24, states that these “priceless German-owned paintings, which might suffer irreparable damage if left in Germany through the winter, have been selected for temporary storage in the United States. These paintings have been gathered from various wartime repositories in the United States Zone of Germany and are being shipped to Washington to insure their safety and to hold them in trust for the people of Germany. The United States Government has promised their return to the German people.”
It cannot be stated too emphatically that the policy of the American Military Government is to return all looted works of art to their owner nations with the greatest possible speed. Since the restitution in August of the famous van Eyck altarpiece, “The Mystic Lamb,” to Belgium, a steady stream of paintings, sculpture, fine furniture and other art objects has poured from the highly organized collecting points of the United States Zone to the liberated countries. Few, if any, looted works of art of any importance are of unknown origin; and though, among the vast masses of material taken from the Jews and other “enemies of the state” for what was always described as “safekeeping” there will undoubtedly be many pieces whose ownership will be difficult to determine, it appears unlikely that these will be found to be of great value.
The shipment of German-owned paintings to the United States is thus a project entirely separate from the main objectives of the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives Section of the Office of Military Government—namely, the restitution of loot and the re-establishment of the German museums and other cultural organizations. To confuse this shipment, which was directed by the highest national authority, with what is now the routine work of preservation, identification and restitution performed by trained specialist personnel is to mislead our Allies and to underrate the accomplishments of a small group of disinterested and hard-working Americans.
Thomas C. Howe Jr.
Lieut. Comdr., USNR, Deputy Chief; Director
on Leave, California Palace of the
Legion of Honor, San Francisco.
European Theatre, Dec. 18, 1945.
The main objectives of the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives Section of American Military Government in Germany were defined in my letter to the New York Times as “the restitution of loot and the re-establishment of the German museums and other cultural institutions.” Honorable and constructive objectives. And, as expressed in that letter, unequivocal and reassuring both to the liberated countries of Europe and to the Germans. Yet how difficult of attainment! How difficult even to keep those objectives clearly in mind when confronted simultaneously—as our officers often were—with a dozen problems of equal urgency!
At close range it was impossible to look objectively at the overall record of our accomplishments. But homeward bound in February I had that opportunity. The pieces of the puzzle began to fit together and the picture took shape. It was possible to determine to what extent we have realized our objectives.
So far as restitution is concerned, the record has been a success. During the summer months our energies were devoted to obvious preliminary preparations. They included the establishment of Central Collecting Points at Munich, Marburg and Wiesbaden. Immediately thereafter, the contents of art repositories in the American Zone were removed to those central depots. The Central Collecting Points, organized and directed by Monuments officers with museum experience, were staffed with trained personnel from German museums. The one at Munich was primarily reserved for looted art, since the majority of the cultural booty was found in Bavaria. The Collecting Points at Wiesbaden and Marburg, on the other hand, housed German-owned collections brought from repositories in which storage conditions were unsatisfactory.
The process of actual restitution was inaugurated by token restitutions in the name of General Eisenhower to Belgium, Holland, France and Czechoslovakia. Circumstances beyond our control postponed similar gestures of good will to Poland and Greece. Representatives of the liberated countries were invited to the American Zone to identify and remove the loot from the collecting points. According to late reports, the restitution of loot was continuing without interruption.
Shortly after my return, there were disquieting rumors of drastic reductions in American personnel connected with cultural restitution in Germany. I earnestly hope that these rumors are without foundation. Such reductions would be disastrous to the completion of a program which has reflected so creditably on our government.
The re-establishment of German museums and other cultural institutions—our second main objective—has been, to a large extent, sacrificed in the interests of restitution. This brings up again the urgent need for the immediate replenishment of our dwindling Fine Arts personnel in Germany. Our moral responsibility for the continuation of this phase of the MFA&A program is a grave one. It was understandably neglected during the first six months of our occupation in Germany. And it would be unfair to argue that the British have far outdistanced us in this field. That they have done so is undeniably true. However, the British found but little loot in their zone. Consequently, they have been able to make rapid strides in the reconstitution of German collections and cultural institutions, while we have been preoccupied with restitution.
Notwithstanding that preoccupation, our Monuments officers were instrumental in arranging a series of impressive exhibitions of German-owned masterpieces. The first of these was held at Marburg in November 1945. A second and more ambitious show, which included many of the finest treasures of the Bavarian State Galleries, opened at Munich in January 1946. A third, comprising paintings and sculptures from the museums of Berlin and Frankfurt, was presented at Wiesbaden in February.
All these exhibitions were accompanied by catalogues with German and English texts. Those of Munich and Wiesbaden were lavishly illustrated. The Munich catalogue contained several plates showing the rooms in which the exhibition was held—lofty, spacious galleries recalling the marble halls of our own National Gallery at Washington.
At the time of my departure from Germany, little was known of French and Russian procedures with regard to cultural rehabilitation in their respective zones of occupation. Their Military Governments have made provisions for personnel capable of carrying on work similar to ours and that of the British.
The caliber of the men drawn into the project from all branches of our Armed Forces has been cited as an important factor in the success of the Monuments, Fine Arts and Archives program. I would like to cite another factor which I consider equally important: There was no arbitrary drafting of personnel; participation was voluntary. The resulting spontaneity and its value to the spirit of the work cannot be exaggerated.