Government Bodies:
The Restitutions Committee
Title
Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications (The Restitutions Committee)
Date established
16 November 2001
Sponsor
The State Secretary of the Netherlands
Description
The Advisory Committee (formerly known as the Polak Committee) was set up by the State Secretary for Education, Culture and Science by order on 16 November 2001 to handle requests for restitution of art objects lost in the Second World War. The Restitutions Committee advises the State Secretary on individual applications for the return of art objects that are now in the possession of the Dutch State. At the request of the State Secretary, it may also make recommendations regarding disputes between private parties about the return of art objects which are not in the possession of the State. The parties to the dispute must submit a joint application to the State Secretary. The Committee is further empowered to make recommendations about the handling of applications submitted in the past. The Committee is chaired by J. M. Polak and the deputy chair is B. J. Asscher.
Since it was set up, the Restitutions Committee has investigated 83 cases and recommended the restitution of art objects in a number of these cases. These recommendations were adopted by the Dutch government. A list of the cases heard and the recommendations made is set out at http://www.restitutiecommissie.nl/en/overzicht_adviezen.html. 34 further claims have been received.
The most recent recommendations were issued on 29 November 2009.
The first was a claim for a watercolour by artist W. Verschuur II by the heirs of Eduard Hollander, a Jewish lawyer from The Hague. The claim was successful, the Committee finding that Hollander lost possession of the watercolour during the war due to forced sale and deeming it likely that he had to use the proceeds from the sale to escape persecution by the Nazis. For details of the Committee's findings, click here.
The second was a claim for four paintings by the heirs of Jewish economist and collector Wilhelm Mautner of Amsterdam. Two paintings, a copy after P. Brueghel II and a work by F. Timmermann, were sold by Mauthner through an agent during the war. The Committee considered the sale to have been involuntary due to circumstances directly related to the Nazi regime and consequently advised the Minister to return the paintings to Mautner's heirs. The Committee rejected the claim to two other paintings, considering there was not enough evidence to prove that Mautner was the original owner. For details of the Committee's findings, click here.
The third claim was for three paintings by the heirs of Jewish art dealer Moritz Schönemann. This claim was rejected, the Committee considering it not proved that the paintings were sold by Schönemann's art dealership during the occupation. For details of the Committee's findings, click here.
The fourth claim was for 25 works of art by the heirs of Jewish art dealer Kurt Walter Bachstitz. The Committee recommended returning only the painting Roman Capriccio by P. Cappelli. Bachstitz sold a large number of works of art to various buyers during the occupation, before fleeing to Switzerland in 1944. In the Committee's opinion, only the sale of Roman Capriccio in 1943 was forced. For details of the Committee's findings, click here.
|
|
NK 1892:
Roman capriccio
by P. Cappelli
Previous recommendations were made on 1 July 2009 and made public on 3 September 2009. One was a negative decision on a claim for 31 works from the dealership of Nathan and Benjamin Katz. The other two were successful claims made respectively by the heirs of Richard Semmel and Hans Ludwig Larsen. The press releases and full texts of the advice can be found for Katz here; for Richard Semmel, here; and for Hans Ludwig Larsen, here.
Other recommendations made in 2009 concern claims by the heirs of Leo Nardus, the art dealer Carel van Lier, Max Cassirer, Catalina Von Pannwitz-Roth, Abraham Adelsberger, Dr Albert Heppner and Ernst Paul Caesar Heinrich Proehl. All these recommendations can be read by clicking here.
The full list of owners whose heirs have made claims to the Committee (and whose names have been published - many have not) and the advice given is set out here:
Friedrich (FBE) and Luise Gutmann
Mr J.H. Gosschalk
The art dealer Cramer
Franz Koenigs
Amsterdam art gallery Vecht
Isaac Goudeket
Jacques Goudstikker
Hartog Koopman
Anne Frank
Arthur Feldmann
Martin Aufhäuser
Milly Antonie von Friedländer-Fuld
Jonas Alexander van Bever
Philipp Brünell
Markus Mayer (Max) Rothstein
Johanna Margaretha Stern-Lippmann
Hugo Felix Kaufmann
Frits Kaufmann and Marie Kaufmann-Parser
Kunsthandel Mozes Mogrobi
Galerie Lemaire (Matthias Ludovicus Joannes Lemaire)
Salomon Anholt, Levie Hakker and Jesaia Hakker
Art dealership Firma Joseph M. Morpurgo
Max Alsberg and Ellinor Käthe Margot Clara Sternberg
Schoontje Goldsteen
Dr. D. van Cappellen
Leopold Salomon and Kätchen Henny Alma Auguste Carstens
Cornelis Maria Leonard ter Laare
Siegfried Paul Daniel May and Rosine Mariane May-Fuld
Franciszek and Czeslaw Letowski
John Jaffé and Anna Emilie Jaffé-Gluge
Marcus de Vries
Israël Z. and Matje Verdoner
Kunsthandel Mossel
Abraham van Leeuwen and Alexander Isaäc van Leeuwen
James Alexandre van Brabant
Firma S. van Messel and dealership J. van Messel of Amsterdam
Rosa and Jakob Oppenheimer
Ernst Flersheim
Hugo and Alice Lachmann
Ernst Flersheim
Art dealership J. Stodel
Art dealership A. Staal
Art dealership Levie Rubens
F. H. von Podwinetz
George Eduard Behrens
Dotsch
Jacques Goudstikker
Robert May
Weijers
Dr Sigmund Wassermann
Kurt Bachstitz
Ernst Paul Caesar Heinrich Proehl
Albert Heppner
Abraham Adelsberger
Catalina Von Pannwitz-Roth
Max Cassirer
Amsterdam art dealer Carel van Lier
Leo Nardus
Hans Ludwig Larsen
Richard Semmel
Art dealership Nathan Katz
Kurt Bachstitz
Art dealership Moritz Schönemann
Wilhelm Mautner
Eduard Hollander
In addition, the Committee has published Annual Reports which are available below:
2002 This annual report includes the history and working practices of the Restitutions Committee, the Parliamentary documents about the foundation of the committee, and information about the five cases dealt with by the committee in 2002. The appendices contain the text of the Decree Establishing the Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications and of the recommendations.
2003 This annual report includes information about the seven cases the Restitutions Committee made recommendations for in 2003. In the appendices are the text of the recommendations, the 'Recommendations Concerning the Art Trade' of the Ekkart Committee, and the response of the government to these.
2004 This annual report includes excerpts from the cases in which the Committee made recommendations in the course of the year, information on the (re)appointing of the members of the Restitutions Committee and explanatory notes on the final recommendations of the Ekkart Committee. In the appendices are the text of the recommendations, the decree (re)appointing members of the Restitutions Committee, the final recommendations of the Ekkart Committee and some media reports.
2005 This annual report includes information about the six cases the Restitutions Committee made recommendations for in 2005. From page 33 onwards is a summary of the Goudstikker recommendation.
2006 In addition to the usual discussion of the recommendations issued by the Committee – 12 in total in 2006 – the 2006 report also contains information on the Committee’s restitution procedure and the events that took place in the field of restitutions in 2006.
2007 This annual report includes details of claims and recommendations made in the course of 2007.
Details of the claims procedure
In order to make claims concerning an object in Dutch State possession, or for recommendations on a dispute, contact:
The Minister of Education, Culture and Science
Ministry of OCW
P.O. Box 16375
2500 BJ The Hague
The Netherlands
The State Secretary forwards claims applications to the Restitutions Committee which is bound to investigate the matter. After completing its investigations, the Committee makes recommendations and the State Secretary makes his decision. If the decision is made to return the art object, the actual transfer to the applicant then takes place. Full details of the procedure are set out at http://www.restitutiecommissie.nl/en/restitutieverzoek_indienen.html.
The Restitutions Committee's own description of itself and the list of its members are set out below:
"Many people lost works of art in the Netherlands during the Second World War. Paintings by well-known and less well-known artists fell into the hands of the Nazis, either because they were confiscated or because the owners were forced to sell them. After the war, countless precious works of art embarked on odysseys through various countries. Despite post-war restitutions, a fairly substantial collection of the works that were returned to the Netherlands remained in the National Art Collection.
From the 1990s onwards, national and international concern grew for the di
