stolen art WW2: Cassirers, Camille Pissarro

 

Camille Pissarro, 1897

Rue St Honoré, Après-Midi, Effet de Pluie

Wiki

Millions of European Jews were forced to quickly sell their hom­es and businesses with WW2, their assets being confiscated by the Nazis. Works of art often seemed very significant to war heirs; they represented a last cultural conn­ect­­ion to their dead families. I particularly thank Marilyn Henry.

Sadly there had been an intentional campaign of con­fis­cation and destruction of European cultural prop­er­ty. Post-war, Allied Forces uncovered cac­h­es of looted goods and the U.S military returned mill­ions of art objects to the countries of the works’ origin. But those nat­ions were responsible for locating the actual heirs. Did they find them?

Once the Nazis sold the objects, the works entered the art market and were dispersed. Both the pre-war owner and the current owner may have had moral claims to the works, but legal ownership varied. Most Western legal sys­t­ems couldn’t deal with losses from other decades, and from oth­er coun­tries. Claims could be barred because Statutes of Lim­it­at­ion expired. Or claims and the rights of a curr­ent possessor were con­fused when art crossed borders. Add­ition­ally most nations had laws that protected good-faith pur­ch­as­ers. And who could define a forced sale? Only Germany recog­nis­ed some sales-under-duress.

In the U.S, most museums are private so ownership disputes were and are civil matters. The New York State Banking Dept estab­lish­ed its Hol­ocaust Claims Processing Office in 1997, to resolve claims without litigation. Since then, it accepted 142 art claims covering 25,000 objects. But the small staff of lawyers, linguists and hist­orians only secured the VERY slow return of 12 art works!

Camille Pissarro, 1897, Wiki

Boulevard Montmartre, Morning, Cloudy Weather

NGV Melbourne

Also in the U.S, the Nazi-Era Provenance Internet Portal created a database linked to American museums, identifying thousands of items that had been in Europe from 1933-45. But while the portal could be searched by an artist’s name, country of origin and a painting’s name, it could not be searched by the family own­er.

An artwork’s ownership chain was often patchy. There WAS a res­ponsibility to participate in provenance research, but it was exp­ensive. The paper trail about prov­enance history was often deposited in: multi-national settings, private family memorabilia, govern­mental or museum arch­iv­es.

Some museums did no additional research to clarify the history, until a claimant came forward. Others eg North Carolina Museum of Art, took the initiative. Artworks with uncertain gaps of war-time ownership were reviewed by prof­essional provenance research­ers.

Museums and collectors are more willing to acknowledge legitimate claims than they were a decade ago, and to settle them without lit­ig­ation. But of course museums and collectors still dispute ten­uous claims. Most museums have put their entire collections on Web sites so now the assertion of claims is much easier than it was.

The size of wartime art thefts will never be known. The size of their return, through some heroic post-war efforts, was very great. But those efforts were eventually seen as incon­sistent with foreign policy, or reflecting cold war ten­s­ions by the 1960s. Only West Germany paid partial com­p­en­sation to some claim­ants; read Nazi Confiscated Art Issues.

Camille Pissarro, 1897

Boulevard Montmartre Spring
Courtauld Institute of Art

These days attention to war-era ownership is emerging in the art wor­ld. Major auction houses and museums have provenance re­search­ers, so sellers and buyers routinely check objects with the Art Loss Reg­is­ter - an international database of lost and stolen art formed in 1991 by auction houses and art traders. Un­for­t­unately this did not happen 50 years ago.. when scrutiny could have helped.

As more artwork is identified and located, other nations are quest­ioning the ownership of their holdings. A number of European count­ries eg Austria and Britain have enacted restitut­ion policies or established independent panels to review claims. However these re­view processes didn’t ensure the recovery of loot­ed art, even with clear evidence. Many claimants, especially the children whose parents died in the Holocaust, continued to be frustrated at the expense and time required to pursue a work.   

The same Pissarro painting in Lilly Cassirer’s Berlin flat, c1930.

artnet news

There were 15 Camille Pissarros (1830–1903) that were painted from his Paris hotel room window. One version was called Boulevard Mont­martre, spring morning,  moved through the hands of two of my favourite art dealers: Galerie Durand-Ruel in Paris who acq­uired it from the art­ist in June 1898; and Paul Cassirer in Berl­in who acquired it from Durand-Ruel in Oct 1902.

Now consider Lilly Cassirer and her second husband Otto Neubauer, who swapped a beautiful Camille Pissarro impressionist painting for their free­d­om. A Nazi-appointed appraiser forced her to sell Rue St Honoré, Après-Midi, Effet de Pluie for $360 then. But when the coup­le fled Munich in 1939, they could not take the funds. Lil­ly’s first husb­and Fritz Cassirer, from the prom­inent German Jewish family of publishers and art dealers, had bought the painting from Pissarro’s agent in 1900.

Although the post-war German government voided the sale, Lilly nev­er re­covered the Pissarro. It was sold multiple times. In 1993, the Sp­anish government paid $350 million for the col­lection of industr­ialist-Nazi supp­ort­er Baron Hans Heinrich Thyssen-Bornemisza and placed in their Museum.

In 2001 in the US, grandson Claude Cassirer (1921-2010) found the painting after years of searching and spent five years trying to recover the Pissarro through diplomatic channels. Finally Claude filed a federal lawsuit in California against Spain and against Thyssen-Bornemisza Foundation to recover the paint­ing, now worth $40mill.   

Lilly Cassirer Neubauer and her beloved heir grandson Claude, born Berlin 1921

Claude's mother died flu 1921; Claude's grandmother loved and raised the child

itsartlaw

Claude Cassirer learned the painting was at the Thyssen-Bornemisza in 2000 and petitioned Spain and the museum to return it. See the legal proceedings: the District Court case was in 2006, the first appeal was 2009-10, the second appeal was 2013, the Spanish Law case was 2015 and a last decision was in 2019. Whose law should app­ly, Spain’s or the USA’s? In 2024 the U.S Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit awarded the painting to the Spanish museum; it was legally bound to decide the case using Spanish law because the thefts occurred there. The Cassirers appealed the 9th Circuit ruling to the Supreme Court which vacated the Circuit Court of Appeals decision. It will now have to reconsider the case in light of the new California law on holocaust survivors' right to reclaim looted art.