US court to rule on Nazi-era ‘sale’ of looted art treasure

The US Supreme Court is set to rule whether the famed Guelph Treasure should be returned to the heirs of four Jewish art dealers.

The US Supreme Court building in Washington. Picture: AFP

The US Supreme Court is to rule in a dispute over whether the famed Guelph Treasure should be returned by a German foundation to the heirs of four Jewish art dealers who argue they were forced to sell it by the Nazis.

The medieval collection of finely crafted golden crosses, reliquaries and portable altars is worth about £230m ($420m). Originally housed in Brunswick Cathedral, it came into the possession of the House of Guelph in 1671, and was sold to a consortium of art dealers in 1929 for 7.5 million reichsmarks.

In June 1935, the Prussian state bought part of the treasure, which is now on show in the Museum of Decorative Arts in Berlin. Most of the rest belongs to museums in the US, Sweden and Germany.

A restitution dispute has been going on for more than a decade. In 2015 descendants of the art dealers filed a lawsuit with a US district court in Washington claiming the 1935 sale, for 4.25 million reichsmarks, far below the market price, had been made under duress from Hermann Goering, who ran Prussia at the time.

The Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation (SPK), which runs Berlin’s state museums, appealed to the US Supreme Court last June seeking a ruling on whether the lawsuit was admissible. The Supreme Court in turn asked the Solicitor-General to make a recommendation. He has issued a statement supporting the SPK’s position that the Supreme Court should overturn the Washington’s court’s ruling that the US has jurisdiction in the case.

The heirs of the Jewish dealers first submitted their claim in Germany in 2008. In 2014 a government-appointed commission on the return of art looted by the Nazis issued a non-binding ruling that the deal could not be considered as a forced sale.

Nicholas O’Donnell, the plaintiffs’ US lawyer, said: “The SPK’s press release is just another instance of Germany pretending to care about Nazi-looted art while doing everything it can to run down the clock until another generation passes away.”

The Times