-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/0dcce2fea33f805043e5177ba480af1e.pdf
9d783a7e527a548931d3f1217e4adb27
PDF Text
Text
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT ,
INTRODUCTION
.
'
,
The US HolocaustAssets Commission Act [PL 105-186] requires this.
tommissi,on to "submit a final report to the President that shall contain any
recommendations for such legislative, administrative, or other actions as it
deems necessary and appropriate."
,
'
The essential conclusion of the Commission's report on,the' fate' of
Holocaust assets is that, given the magnitude of dispossessed property located
.
.
during and immediately after the war, little, if any, effort was made to restitute
looted assets and 'lost prope~ty rights to individual victims.
That is not to say that the United States made no effort to return assets
to the countries from which they were taken nor is it to say that the United
States lacked good reason for failing to make restitution of identifiable property'
to individual victims. Rather, it i,s to say that given the political, military and
, economic demands on the United States at the end of the war, restitution of
individual, property was not of primary concern.
In 1998, the Congress expressed its concern for restitution of individual
,
.
.
property in the Holocaust Victims Redress Act [PL 105-158]: "It is the sense of
the C;ong~ess that consistent with the 1,90?" ~ague Convention, all governme'nts
should undertake good faith efforts to facilitate the return of private and public
property, such as works of art, to the rightful owners incases where assets
, were confiscated from the claimant during the period of Nazi rule and there IS '
reasonable proof that the claimant is the rightful owner."
. ,
Accordingly, these proposed recommendations address the problems
raised by the application of the prevailing policies and practices of the early
post-war'periodand suggest ways to remepy those problems some half a
century'later.
I
(
.
\ .
The recommendations apply across asset groups - gold, financial assets,
art and cultural property - and are presented under two general Holocaust-Era
,
'
1
�.'.
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
headings: Restitution and Research. Other areas of concern are addressed,last
under the heading Options.
DEFINITIONS
In order to insure that proposed recom'mendations are clearly understood
and to insure, as well, that theydo not extend beyond the Commission's
jurisdiction, the staff proposes that the following definitions of certain terms be
adopted by the Commission in preparing their recommendations ..
PERSECUTEE: An individual who, while in a territory controlled or occupied by
the Nazis, was deprived of life, liberty and/or property pursuant to any law,
,
decree or regulation imposed insuth territory discriminating against political;
racial or religious groups.
[_Is the Trading with the En~my ACt, Section 32 (1946) a good
reference?
_Find other reference]
DURESS PROPERTY: "Property which has been the subject of duress, wrongful
acts of confiscation, dispossession or spoliation, whether pursuant to .
! . ,
•
,
.,'
. '
'
.
legislation or by procedures purporting to follow forms of law or otherwise" in
territories controlled or occupied by the Nazis between 1933 and 1945.:
-Military Law 52 which was promulgated in September, 1944, used
this description of "duress property" to identify a category of property subject
.to seizure by the United S,tates Military Government.
.
.
Holocaust-Era Art: Any unique work of art that was made'~efore 1945 and
changed hands after 1932, and was Or could have been in Germany; in any area
occupied by the military forces of the Nazi government of Germany; in any
country established with the assistance or cooperation'of the Nazi government
,
,
,
2
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
of Germany; or in any co'untry that was an ally of the Nazi government
of .
Germany from 1933 through 1945.
-Holocaust-Era Art is
a subset of the more inclusive category of
Holocaust-era assets defined by Public Law 105-186. (creating the.
Commission) to mean "assets that came 'into the possession or control of
th~ Federal Government ... at any time afterJanuary 30, 1933 after
.' having been obtained from victims of the Holocaust by on behalf of, or
under authority of' or "left unclaimed as a result of actions taken by," on
. behalf of, or under authority of (1) the Nazi .government of Germany; (2)
.
'
,
\
any government in any area occupied by the military forces of the Nazi
government of Germany; (3) anygovernmenfest~blished with the
assistance or cooperation of the Nazi government of Germany
cooperation 'of the Nazi government'of,Germany; and '(4) any government
which was an ally of the Nazi government of Germany. "
.
.
.
-The Association of Art Museum Directo~s (AAMD) guidelines refer
to 'work "related to an illegal confiscation during the Nazi/World .War II
era."
-The Washington Conference Principles refer to art confiscated by
the Nazi's from pre-war owners.
-The AAM guidelines refer to :'objects that may have been
unlawfully appropriated during the Nazi era (1933-1945) as a result of
actions in furtherance of the Hoiocaust or taken by the Nazis or their'
collaborators."
•
•
u
•
'
•
'
-Museums 'have variously defined their criteria for identifying
Holocaust art. For example, the Tate Museum, in theory, would examine
"every work in the Collection w~ich was acquired after 1932, made before
1945 and was or could have been in areas of Europe occup,ied. by the
Nazis between 1933 and 1945." The Boston Museum of Fine Arts is
examining works that had apparently been traded in Germany,' ALJstria, or
3
�·
,
Recommendations package
June 30 DRAFT.
France during the period of Nazi rule, coming onte) the art market during.
the iperiod 1933-1945 .
•This is not the same as a "red flag" exercise .. The definition of
Holocaust-Era Art is meant to be inclusive of every work meetingan .
objective criteria and not dependent on anyone's judgment' as to the
validity of provenance ort~e meaning of a gap in provenance or the
effect of seemingly voluntary transfer .
..A "seemingly voluntary transfer" could be deemed invalid
.
'
pursuant to the London Declaration of 1943 in which the Allies
warned thatthey intended to do their utmost,to "defeat the
methods of dispossession" practiced by the enemy and, further,
that they reserved th'e right to declare any such transfers of
, .
property invalid, including those "transactions apparently legal in
form, even when purported to be voluntarily effected:!
,
'
'
�, Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
I.
RESJITUTION
A. Claims for identifiable assets in the United States
1. Statute of limitations
: I
RECOMMENDATION (I.A.1): Waive the statute of'limitations for claims brought
in the United States for restitution of .specific categories of Holocaust assets to
the original owner or his heirs .
• A person
may bring an action'in replevin to recover stolen goods
by alleging (1) his title or right the property; (2) that the property is
unlawfully detained; and (3) t~a:t the defen~ant wrongfully holds
possession .
• A statute of limita.tions limits ,the period in which a plaintiff
retains the legal right to assert a valid claim in court. If an action in
replevin is time-barred under a statute of limitations (generally two to
six years), the possessor of the stolen property has effectively acquired
. '
,"
.
' .
title.
, .Thewaiver of the statute oflimitations would apply only to
Holocaust-Era Art and other similarly clearly defined categories of ,
cultural property looted by the Nazis between 1933 and property of
.
,
.
.
Holocaust assets
,
'
"
.There is precedent for waiving the statute of limitations':
••The Matteoli Mission recommends that U[i]n cases where
property, the ,existence of which in 1940
is'establish~,d,
has been
the subject of spoliation but has not yet been returned or
•
.
.
.
'
I '
5
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
compensated, compensation i,s a right irrespective of any statutes
of limitations which may be in effect."
••The Committee on Culture and Education of the
'Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe adopted a draft
resolution on Looted Jewish Cultural Property stating that in order
.
,
'
to facilitate victim restitution, legislation should extend or remove
limitations periods .
• Under the international legal principle lex situs, the law of the
nation where the art is located at the time of transfer is the governing law
for any legal actions concerning the art.
••Ordinarily, under a discovery rule, the. statute of
limitations begins to run when the original owner discovers or
should have discovered the whereabouts of the stolen property.
The burden, therefore, is on the true owner of the property to
discover the location of the property instead of on the possessor to
demonstrate good faith in his acquisition. " . ,
•• Under New York's demand and refusal rule, the statute
does not begin to.run until the original owner demands that the
possessor return the stolen property and the possessor refuses.
:
The New York rule operates more favorably for lost art claimants
than the discovery rule .
• There is precedent for creating a new federal cause of
action for Holocaust claims in a bi'li current pending in the 106th
. Congress entitled "A bill to amend title 28 of the United States
Code to authorize Federal district courts to hear civil actions to
recover damages or secur.e relief for certain injuries to persons and
property under or resulting from the Nazi government of Germany"
[S.l 856 (also H.R. 3245 and H.R. 3402)].
6
�Recommendations package .. June 30 DRAFT
I'
e.S. 1856 would authorize federal district courts "to
hear and decide, on or. before January 1, '2010, any civil
,
action to recover damages or secure relief from certain
injuries resulting from actions ofthe Nazi government of
Germany during the period from January 1, 1933, and
Decembe(31, 1945, including injuries resulting from having
been: (1) required to perform. involuntary labor; (2) subjected
to involuntary medical treatment; (3) deprived of property
located in Germany; or (4) denied payment on insurance
policies owned by or covering persons residing in Germany.
'
.
2. Alternative Dispute Resolution
RECOMMENDATION (I.A.2): Provide some forum and/or define a mechanism .r
other thar,l the courts for mediation and/or arbitration of claims for restitution
of Holocaust assets.
eln arbitration, the arbitrator is a neutral third party (or panel) who
.
.,
hears both sides and renders a binding decision.· In mediation, the
mediator helps disputing parties reach an agreement 'but cannot impose
his decision on the parties.
eThe 1998 Washington C<?nference ·principles.onNazF-Confis:ated
Art propose that nations develop processes· to implement the principles
"particularly as they relate to alternative dispute resolution mechanism
for resolving ownership issues."
eThe 1998 AAMD guid~lines'. sugge,st using mediation wherever
.
.
reasonably practfcal in order to re~oncile "the interests of individuals or. '
their heirs who were dispossessed of works of art with the complex. legal
obligations and responsibilities of art museums to the public for whom
they hold works of cut in'trust."
,
,
,
. eThe ·1999 AAM guidelines suggest.that "when appropriate and
reasonably practical; museums should seek methods other than litigation
7
�Recommendations package - Jurie 30 DRAFT
, (mediation) to resolve claims .that an object was unlawfully appropriated,
during the Nazi era without subsequentrestitution."
.Witnesses at the Commission's Art Committee hearing on April
12 recommended establishing alternatives to litigation although Attorn'ey
Tho'mas Kline suggested that without the pressure of litigation, there
would be no incentive to settle .
• The United, Kingdom, like the United States, was not 'invaded anc;i
pillaged by the Nazis. The United Kingdom has, however established a
, "Spoliation Advisory Panel" to consider claims from anyone (or his heirs)
who lost possession of a cultural object during the Nazi era (1933- f 945)
where the object is in the possession of a United Kingdom museum or
'gallery. The Panel will advise the claimant and the instit.ution on what
action would be appropriate to 'resolve the claim. Panel recommendation,s
are not bindin'g but if the Claimant accepts the recommendation, it is in
full settlement of the claim.
3.
Alien Property Custodian
RECOMMENDATION (I.A.3): Reopen the claims process for victims (or their,
heirs) whose property was vested in the,Alien, Property Custodian and never
returned or who were never otherwise compensated for their losses.,
.Pursuant to a series of e)(ecutiveorders iss!Jed in 1941 and 1-942,
any property within the United States owned or controlled by a"
designatedenemy country or national th,ereof'could be transferred or
vested in the Alien Property Custodian (qperating within the Executive
Offic,e of the President) as he: deemed necessary in the national interest.
No exception was made for assets belonging to foreign nationals who
were' persecutees'~
.After the war, arid until April, 1955, ,a persecutee could file a claim.
for the return of property taken by the Alien Property Custodian. For
8
�,
"
.
'
I
Recommendations package ~ June,,30DRAFT
"
:,
varipus reasol1s, including the'expense and' diffic:ulty in fHing, many"
persecutees were unable to s!Jbmita claim before the deadline.,
r' .,
eEven where property wa's'~eturn~d to apers~cute~,'itsvalue may
have been substantially diminished by virtue of its management by the
Alien Property Custodi~n.' F6rex~mple, if a patent'orcopyright vestediil, '
, the ,Alien Property Custodian were releas,ed into the public,do'main, th,~
'valye of that property right would have been lost.' ':
,
"
"",
'
".
,"
, "
I
,
j,
.","
f .Cene wi/I ask Ell Rosenb£!rg whetherJust(ce /fils authority to
" proces's these Clairhs through itsFiJreign Claims Offi4e or'whether '
Congress would have toreinstate the· Office bfAlien,IPropertythat it
, ' , '
, abolisf!e,din 1988. I ' ,
'""..
i'
~
I
"
"
,
' , '
'
, "
A., Military Installations
'"''
I
!
"
",'. ~ .
I
b,e
,
" ,,J ,
RECOMMENDATION O:AA): Ca;nvas~ UnitedState~' military ihstaJlations 'to'
determine whether 'property any unrestituted victims' property
have been
Uired in, 1945 or thereafter. '
1 , '~
,
•
'
,
.'
.
.
,
. , '
,
, ' , 'i '
',,"
may,
~
. < '
,
,,,'
,
•
i
'
"
[.Cet cite from Genere.fhe British canvassing 'their.'military
..
installations,]
I
~.
, .
'
..'
.
.,
.~
, B.' "Unidentifiable" assets in the United States.
,I
,
, ,
',',
'
"
,',' "
',I
'j'
,:
'
RECOMMENDATION (I.B) Recognize the failure ,of the UnitedStates to "
'~dequateIY co~pensatethe Jewish, cOrluriunity for"~nclairriJd victims' assets
vested in the Alien PropertyCustbdian by,making an additidnal lumpsu~
.
payment fo an appropriate' successor agency. ,
;
\',
1,"
,!
.the Jewish Restitution Successor OrganiiationORSO) received
o~ly $ 500,'OOq,in a communal: ~ettlement of daims fOr unClaimed'
, property vested ,in the OffiCe ofAlien property. The qriginal legislation'
l
had; askedfor~ $3 million.
',"
,
. :
'
J
,
,
.J
I
,.
•
•
,
"
'
.,'"
,
,',
.
.
l.
' - " , '
I
"
'
.,'
•
"
,
~
'"
•
'~"
!
,!
,9 .
,,'
I
j
'
"
�Recommendations package I
,
.,
:
Jun~
'
30 DRAFT
'
e. Identifiable assets in the possession of the United States in Europe
1.
External restitution(return of property looted outside of Germany)
RECOMMENDATION (I.e. 1): Undertake an official government to government
follow-upon the status of assets transferred to "countries of origin" by United"
States forces to determine if these assets were properly r~stituted to their
lawful
pw~ers.
,
,
.When the Un'ited States forces took possession of looted assets
after the war, the general policy,' consistent with international law arid
practice, was to
retyrnid~ntifiable
property to the country of origin.
, .To varying extent, the receipts for delivery of these assets to the'
countries of origin required those countries to return the assets to the
lawful owners. For example, in a document entitled "Receipt and
~greement for Delivery of Cultural Objects" distributed to U.S. fqrces in
Europe in September, 1945, by'command of General Eisenhower, the
, receiving government agreed that "the items'described in Schedule 'A,'
attached, will be held by it as custodians pending the determination of
the lawful owners thereof, that said items will ,be returned to their lawful
owners within the territorialjurisdiction of said Government" and the).!
within 6 months, it would provide, inter alia, a "statement of all the
fnformation available:to it with respect to ownership, possession, seizure
or transfer of each ,item since September 1,1939."
••The restitution of vi'ctims' assets by the "countries of
origin" has not been consistent .
I
•• The Stolen Art Restitution Act [H.R. 4138], introduced but
not passed in the 105 th Congress, would have asked all
governments in . possession of artwork stolen from victims of the
' .
.
, Holocaust to return that artwork to its rightful owners.
i
10
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT '
.Victims' assets recovered by the United States from the Nazis, ,
were, in effect, held in trust by the United States until they could be
returned to those victims. ,The United States, therefore, had (or still has),
.
a fiduciary duty to the victims that may not have been fully discharged by
returning looted assets to the country of origin .
,
.2. Internal Restitution (return of property within Germany)
RECOMMENDATION I.C2: Recognize and acknowledge that the failure'of
United States Military Government Property Control to effect "full and
speedy" recovery of "duress property" in Germany by making an
additional lump sum payment to an appropriate successor agency.
.
.,
,
, • Under United States Military Law 52, property within German, "
territory was subject to seizure by the United States Military Government
including "[p)roperty which has been the subject of duress, wrongfu,f acts
of confiscation, dispossession or spoliation, w~ether pursuant to
legislation or by procedure~ purporting to f?lIow forms of law or
otherwise ... "
•• United States military government policy in Germany
provided that perso.ns or organizations deprived of property as a
result of Nazi persecution should have the property returned or
receive compensation. Over 90% of the persecutee property was
Jewish .
• Internal restitution was the responsibility of Property Control that
operated from 1945-1949 after which responsibilities were handed over
to the Office of the United States High CommiSSion for Germany.
, .United States Military Law 59 promulgatedin'November, 1949,
defined the procedure for implementing the , restitution .of identifiable
property that, for reasons of r~ce," religion,nationality, ideology, political
conviction, had been transferred under duress during the Nati regime.
,
11
�Recommendations
pac~age
- June 30 DRAFT
I
I.
..Military Law 59 promised "full and speedy" recovery but
the regulations adopted by Property Control undercut both.
I
.
.
•• Any transfer of property made by a person "who belonged
to a class of persons which ... was to be eliminated in its entirety
from the cultural and economic life of Germany" between January
30,.1933 and May 8, 1945 would be presumed to have been an act
of confiscation .
••The strict adherence to the December 31, 1948 deadline
for filing petitions for restitution.(extendeO to May 1, 1949 for·
incomplete submissions) together with the lengthy, cumbersome
and expensive procedure prevented many rightful owners from
asserting their rights.
.
'.
,
.
•• Private settlements usually resulted in claimants taking
less than what they were owed.,
•• Individual claimscan no longer be revived and
unjust
s~ttlements
cannot be supplemented.
D. Heirless assets
1. Unique assets
RECOMMENTATION (1.0.1): In the event it is determined,that a unique Holocaust
asset has been stolen and not restituted, it should be left where it is located
and its history acknowledged with appropriate notice .
• With respect to he,irless art, the Matteoli Mission
recommends leaving "despoiled works and objets d'art, or those of.
uncert~in origin" where they are presently located provided that'
12
�.
,
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
such location provide the widest possible dissemination of a
catalogue of despoiled works;, the museum install in the immediate
vicinity of each work obtained through spoliation or of uncertain
origin, a regularly updated panel indicating the available
information as to the or,igin of the work in question; and that an
Internet site b'e set up in e~ch museum open to the public and
presenting the works obtained through spoliation or of uncertain
.
.
.
,"
origins, and constant, loop projection of these works .
•• Book collections acquired by public institutions can
be similarly identified and recognized:
2. Other cultural assets
NDA TlON (1.D.2): Is there one?
.In April, 1947 ,the Jewish Cultural. Recoflstruction, Inc.
, UCR)" was appointed by the Unite9 State military government in
Germany (OMGUS) to act as trustee forthe receipt and distribution
of Jewish heirless Jewish cultural property .
••OMGUS defined heirless Jewish property as property that
"no claims have been received for and [for which] no identification'
of prior ownership ,can reasonably be established."
, .In August 1948, the United States Military Government in
Germanyrecognized the authority of Jewish Restitution Successor
Organization URSa) to petition for heirless and unclaimed Jewish-owned
property. ,
I
••To prevent-duress property from reverting to the Gentian
,
.authorities, the JRSO petitioned for all potentially relevant property
resulting in numerous duplicate clai'ms that tended to subordinate
individual property' rights to'communal ones.
13
�I
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
••Assets acquired by, the jRSO were auctioned in New York
and the proceeds were used to support jewish refugee agencies.
,
.
E.
State Department.
.
,
RECOMMENDATION (LE.l): Continue efforts leading up to and following the
Washington Conference on Holocaust-era Assets to promote international' .
cooperation on Holocaust issues .
• At the London Conference on Nazi. Gold in December, 1.997, the.
.
participants to compile an international gUide to archival sources on Nazi
Gold and related issues. The guide has' been published electronically on
the ,United States Holocaust Memorial Museum central web site. The U~S.
Holocaust Memorial Museum also maintains an international list of
current activities regarding Holocaust assets.
.
,
.
• In the spring of 1998, the Swedish Prime Minister Goran Persson.
initiated the Task Force for International Cooperation on Holocaust
Education, Remembrance and Research. The ·working group indud'ed
representatives from nine countries: Fran~e, Germany, Israel, Italy,The
Net~erlands, Poland: Sw~den, United Kingdom and USA.
• The Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust was
convened in january 2000 to"·"pass.on the remembrance of the Holocaust'
and support educatio'n 'and research on this dark chapter of 20 th century
history." Representatives of _______ countries attended.
,(
(
RECOMMENDATION (I.E.2): Maintain an office for Holocaust assets issues (if not
.
I
.
.
all Holocaust issues) at the State Department to provide a point person for
international activities related to the Holocaust assets.
14
i
�'Recbm~endations package - June 30 DRAFT
I
,
eUntil she retired in 1968, Ardelia Hall provided an active presence
in the State Department on issues related to Holocaust assets.
eFoliowing the Washington Conference in 1'998, J.D. Bindenagel
wa~ appointed Special Envoy for Holocaust issues at the State Department
with the title of Ambassador. His appointment, which i,nc!udes
jurisdiction over such other Holocaust issues as slave labor and
insurance, expires at the end of the yea~.
,eelt has been suggested thatthe State Department office be
replaced with an NGO .that would ~ot be bound by the ,restrictive
government laws and regulations that apply to' government
agencies.
r '
, ' "
E. Taxation
RECOM~ENDATION
(I.E): No income tax should be imposed on restitution'of
any Holocaust assets to victims.
Thefollowi'ng bills are currently pending in the 106 th 'Congress:
eS. 779 would lim'it the exemption from taxation to Swiss proceeds,
and awards resulting out of victim litigation in New York or similar
litigation.
eH.R. 1292 would exempt from taxation any amount received as a
result of moral or legal injustice as a Holocaust victim."
, " eH.R. 390 would exempt from taxation several forms of the
including Claims'''relating to looted art or financial assets."
II.
A.
RESEARCH'
Databases
15
�,
"
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
RECOMMENDATION (lLA): Provide feder~lfunding to~stablish and, maintain
centralized databases, national arid international, relative to Holocaust-era
research .. [See also RECOMMENDATfoNS' (lLA.1); (lLA.2), and (lLA.3)]
: .In the course of the Commi~sion's work, three different k'inds. of
.
.
."
asset databases have been varioLisly discussed: ·one listing all known
Holocaust":'Era Art in museums and'other collections;' one listing
outstanding claims for the return of lost Holocaust-Era Art; and one'
listing ali works known,to have been looted by the Nazis., Each serves a·
different purpose in fulfilling.the Commissio,n's mandate.
1.
Asset database
RECOMMENDATION (lLA.1) Provide feqeral f~nding to establish and maintain
centralizea database containing, a registry of [unique] Holocaust-Era Art in
'the United States and to support an internation'al database for Holocaust-Era
Art.
all
.There are,a finite (but unknown) number of works of HolocaustEra Art in the United States that can be identified for inclusion on a
,
central database pursuant to clear, objective criteria., See' definition of
Holocaust-Era Art.\
I
,
'
.Although only some of this Holocaust-Era Art will have gaps or
.
' .
suspicious .gaps in provenance, all of .it should be listed to insure that no
..
.
.
.
,
.
wor;k is mistakenly omitted because, for example, of a seemingly valid'
transfer. See London Declaration of 1943;
'
'
,.
~
.Combining the provenance documentation gathered by museums,
auction houses and private dealers, et aI., into a single list of all
.
Holocaust-Era Art in the United States would result in consistent
.
standards for provenance research. and disclosure.
."
,
.
16
I
�Recommendations package.:.. June 30 DRAFT
I
.An asset database serves the interests of the victim/claimants b'y
assembling on one accessible site the location and provenan'ce of all
known Holocaust-Era Art.
. .Certain museums (prompted in part by thi,s Commission) have
searched,their collections and have publishedQ,nthe internet - in varying
degrees of specificity and format and conforming to no particular
, ~tandard - lists relating to Holocaust-Era Art. For example
••The Metropolitan Museum released "a list of [393]
European paintings with incomplete provenance for the Nazi/World
War II era"with the explanation that "[I]nclusion on this list
indicates that more information is required to complete our
knowledge of the ownership of these works during the Nazi/World
War II era." De Montebello·testified that the Met had 2700
European paintings in its collection.
4
•
,~
•
,.
,',
I '
••The Museum of Modern Art owns approximately 900.
paintings created before 1945 and acquired after 1933. Of this
number, about 500 were or could have been in Europe during the
1930s and 1940s. The Museum lists only those' where provenance
re'cords are incomplete;
••The Chicago Art Institute released a list of paintings and
sculpture in the collection for which links 'in th~ chain of ownership
for the years 1933-1945 are still unclear or not yet fully
documented.
RECOMMENDATION (lI.A.1 .a) Impose by legislation a mandatory requirement
that full provenance,ilJformation,relati~g to any Holocaust-Era Art offered for, '
sale by any merchant (see 'UCC definition) or auction house be submitted to a
central registry or asset database .
• Auction houses publish catalogues that mayor may not incluqe
full provenance for Holocaust-'Era ~rt being off~red for ~ale; , ,
�Recommendations package - June 30.DRAFT
.The art market is, secretive by nature,with many buyers'
preferring anonymity, and some' art dealers going to great lengths to
conceal the true origin of a painting for (:ommercial reasons. This
recommendation would apply, however, only to Holocaust-Era Art .
• Dealers rely on promises of confidentiality but there is no legal
basis for such promises .
• • See, e.g., DeWeerth v. Baldinger, 836 F.2d 103 (2nd Cir.
I
1987) i~ whi~h DeWeerth discovered from a Catalogue Raisonne .
that his Monet painting - stolen during the war - had been sold by
Wildenstein in 1957 and that Wildenstein had exhibi.ted it in 19.70.
In 1982; DeWeerth retained counsel in New York and requested ..
Wildenstein to identify the current owner. When WiI~enstein
, refused, DeWeerth brought an action in New York Supreme Court.
In December 1982, the court ruled in favor of DeW~erth, and
, Wildenstein was compelled to id~ntify Baldinger as the current
owner. DeWeerth then sued Baldinger for return of the painting.
\
.
.
.The Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) requires good faith in the
performance and enforcement of every' commercial contract. Under'
Section 2-312 of the UCC, there is'lmplied in all sales contracts a
warranty by the seller that "(a) the title conveyed shall be good, and its, .
transfer'rightful; and (b) the goods shall be delivered free from any
security interest or other lien or encumbrance of which the buyer at the
. time , of contracting has no knowledge."
.
••This warranty may be waived only by "specific language or
by circumstances which give the buyer reason tdknow that the
, person selling does not claim title in himself or that he is
: 'purporting to sell only such right or title as he or a third, persol)
,
, may have." This disclaimer m'ay not, however, apply for purposes
of a warranty in the case of unique works of art.
.
18
�"
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
•• Since under the common .law, a thief cannot convey good
title, no dealer or auction house can insure good title in a stolen
,work of art .
• A "merchant," i.e., a person who deals in the goods involved in
the transaction or who otherwise holds himself out as having knowledge
or skills, peculiar to those goods, must, in addition, observe "reasonable
commercial standards of fair dealing in the trade." At least one court has
indicated that "reasonable cornmercialstandards" wduld require that
"
an
,
" art dealer not demonstrate indifference to the quality of title. Porter v..
Wertz, 68 A.D. 2d 141,416 N.Y.DS.2d 254 (1979), afrdon other
grounds, 53 N.Y.2d 696, 421 N.E.2d 500,439 N.YiS. 2d 105 (1981).
,
,
.The Stolen Art Restitution Act [H.R. 4138], introduced but not
passed in the 105 th Congress, would have enacted the following title'
checking procedure applicable to ~ art valued in excess of $5000, not
just'the Holocaust-Era Art subject to the Commission':
•• "(a) INQUIRY REQUIRED ON REQUEST-If a request is
made under subsection (b), the seller or the purchaser of artwork
with sales price of $5,000 or more, that at any time has been
shipped in interstate or foreign commerce" shall before the sale'
undertake a documented, re'asonable inquiry into the ownership
a
history of the artwork,
fn~luding
obtaining
infor~ati6n
from one ,or
more missing or stol,en artwork registries.
(b) REQUEST-Before a sale described in subsection (a), an
individual may request an inquiry under that subse,ction if the
individual produces sufficient evidence, according to standards
established by the Attorney General, that the artwork for which the
individual requests an inquiry was stolen from the individual or
from a member of the individual's family."
2. Claimant database
19
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
RECOMMENDATION (lI.A.2) Provide federal funding to establish a single,
computerized~ easily accessible database of claims for Holocaust-Era Art.
• A claimant database serves researchers for museums, libraries,
dea:lers, auction houses, et aI., who, exercising minimal due diligence,
nee'd to know whether a particular asset is alleged to have been stole'n .
• Existing claimants' databases could contribute their Holocaust
Era :Art informat,ion to a single, ea~ily accessible, accredited database,: "
•• , The Art Loss Register (ALR) has a computer database of
over 100,000 works of art that have been stolen and looted over
the past 50 years.Workin'g in cooperation with the leading art'
auction houses of the world, as well as insurance agencies and art
traders, ALR claims to have identified and, in many cases reunited,
valuables worth $ 75 with their original owners."
'••The Commission for Art Recovery [CAR] collects
information from claimants and compares it to i~formation '
gathered by its researchers from insurance policies, inventories,
, exhibition catalogues and other documentary sources. When a
claimed work matches a,looted work, information regarding the
s~a:tus and current whereabouts of the work is turned over 'to the
I
claimant so that he or she ,may proceed in the pursuifof his or her
claim .
_!
•• The Holocaust Claims Processing Office accepts claims
from U.[a]"nyone with reason to believe that art belonging,.~o them
'
"
\
.
or a relative was lost, looted or stolen between January 1, 1933 and'
May 9, 1945. Infqrmation provided on the claim form is' compared
with provenance data, insurance company and museum records,
Nazi confiscation lists, auction catalogues, and oth,er resources in
I
an effort to locate the missing work of art and aid in its recovery:
20
�,
,
,
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
,
,
'
3. Looted' art database
RECOMMENDA-rION (lI.A.3): Provide federal funding to complete work on the'
preparation of a master list of looted Holocaust-Era Art.'
• There are lists of looted art, e.g., the Linz collection list, Goering
collection list, consolidated interrogation reports, etc., documenting work
,
.
,
that was unlawfully confiscated.
I
• The Office of Special Investigations (051) in the Justice
Department began such a list and it has been circulated to the art team .
• A looted art database serves all researchers and would be
particularly helpful in establishing, as a starting point, that a particular
work had, in fact, been looted.
\
B. Documentation
I
1. Provenance documentation
RECOMMENbATION (II.B.1 ):' Provide federa'igrants tothose museums, libraries
I
and universities with Holocaust-Era Artcollections that have been unable todo
"}
provenance research due to the lack of resources and staff.
.
,
• Precedent for such grants exists, for exampl~, in programs
managed by the Institute for Museum and Library Services (IMLS).
2. Claimant documentation
RECOMMENDATION (II.B.2.a): Provide federal funding or other resources to
assist viqims in obtaining documentation to establish a claim. See also
RECOMMENDATION (II.B.2.b).
21
�·
,
Recommendations package:- June 30 DRAFT
I '
.Most victims whose assets were confiscated by the Nazis do not
have the resource's or information to pursue a claim .
• To prove a claim for the return of a Holocaust asset, it must be
shown that (a) the claimant is or is the legitimate heir of the true owner
of the property, (b) the property has been unlawfully or wrongfully'
confiscated by the Nazis or their coliaborators'[See RECOMMENDATION
, (lLA.3)] and (c) the property' was not subsequently
,
owner or his heirs.
resti~uted
.
to the true
.
.
~' '.Ifclaimant seeks restitution of Holocaust-Era Art, the p'rovenan'ce
of which has been fully disclosed by amuseum or other party possessing
the art, the burden shifts to the claimant to prove ownership.·
•• The AAMD and the AAM guidelines'state that the'
museum should request evidence of ownership from the 'claimant
in order to assist ,in determining the provenance of a work of art .
•• In the case of the Cranach at the North Carolina Museum
, of Art, the parties agreed that the settlement negotiations were
successful because of the high quality of the claimants'
documentation.
,
"
••The standard of proof should be "legal sufficiency."
RECOMMENATION (lLB.2.b): Provide federal funding for a claims'processing
office on the model of New York's HolocaustClaims Processing Office (HCPO).
• "Anyone with reason to believe that art belongin~ to them or a
relative was lost, looted or stolen between January 1, 1933 and May 9,
1945 may'submit a claim with the Holocaust Claims Processing Office.
Information provided on the claim form will be used as a starting point
for archival research. Moreover, it will be compared with provenance data,
insurance company and museum records, Nazi confiscation lists, auction
22
�Rec~mmendations
package - June 30 DRAFT ,
cat~logues,
and other resources in an effortto locate the ,missing work of
art land aid in its 'recovery."
c.,
1.
'
Access to archives,
National
archiv~s'
RECOMMENDATION (l1.C.1 .a): Provide federal funding to assemble public
records and documents relating to the disposition of Holocaust era assets arid
,
,
make them readily, accessible, via the internet, to scholars~claimants and other
researchers .
• The Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confiscated Art
incl'ude the following:
,'~II. Relevant records and archives should be open and
"
accessible to researchers, in accordarice with the guidelines of the
International Council on Arc,hives.
,
III. Resources and personnel should be made available to
facilitate the identification of all art,t~at had been confiscated by
the Nazis and not subsequently restituted."
.
.The National Archi\les and Records Administration (NARA) has produced
a "finding aid" (in book form and on-line) to locate records a,t the National
Archives at College Part which ,focus primarily on efforts to identify, recoveLand
restitute assets hidden or stolen by Nazi Ge~many during World War II.
a. Declassification of.records
RECOMMENDATION (l1.C.1.a): ~o~tinu,e to declassify docu~ents relating to the
'Holocaust;"'era assets .
• The Nazi War Criminal Recprds Interagency Working Group was
established pursuant to the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act (PL 105-246)
23
�Recommendations package
June 30 DRAFT "
to "locate, identify, inv'entory, recom'mend for dedassification; and make
available to the public at the National Archives and Records
Administration, all classified Nazi war-criminal records' of the United
,
States," including those that
,
" ... pertain,to any transaction a's to 'which 'the United States,
Government, in its sole discretion, has grounds to believe ...
(A) involved assets taken 'from persecuted persons during the
period beginning on March 23,1933, and ending onMay 8, 1945,
by, under the direction of, on behalfof, or under authority granted
by the Nazi government of Germany or any nation then allied with
i
that government; and
(B) such transaction was completed without the assent of the
owners of those assets or their heirs or assigns or other legitimate
representatives."
i
I
"
.Lists of recently declassified records are regularly posted on
NA~A's website at http://www.nara.gov/research/assets.
I
b. Destruction of records
RECOMMENDATION (11.C.1.b): Cease routine destruction of Holocaust-era.files
and documents.
I
2. International archives
RECOMMENDATION (lLC.2) Continue to support the archival initiatives of the
Task Forc~ for International Cooperation on Holocaust Education, Remembrance
and Resea~ch established in Stockh'olm in May 1998.
.In an appendix to the Washington Conference on Holocaust-era
Assets, the Task Force reported that
,
On the specific issue of Holocaust-era assets, an Internet
based international guide to archival sources is at pres,ent being
i
'
I
,
,
24
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
,
\
created, following discussions held at ~he London Conference on
Nazi Gold in' Novem~er 1997, and the subsequent proposal made
by the United King"domin June 1998 at the planning seminar for
the Washington Conference., An encouraging number of countries
and institutions have already~ade details of their archival holdings
, and access arrangements available on dedicated'websites, linked
by a central information site managed by the U,nited States,
Holocaust Memorial Museum (www.ushmm.gov/assets). '
, In order to maximize the effectiveness of these "
developments in the field of Holocaust education, remembrance,
and research, the Task Force encourages all governments and
archival institutions to give further cooperation and support to the'
, , microfilming projects run by the United States Holocaust Memorial
Museum and Yad Vashem; and to extend thei'r contributions to the
international 'guide to archives on Holocaust-era assets to include
details of all Holocaust-related archival material. The goal must be
the widest possible disse'mination of information for the benefit of
all those who wish to learn more about the Holocaust.
I
I
!
"
.
RECOMMEr'JDATION '(l1.C.2.a): Increase efforts to gain access to Russian archives
and obtain Russian compliance with the Washington Conference, Principles on
Nazi-Confiscated Art.
eUntil recently, Russia had taken the position that the art, books
and arc'hives removed from Germany at the end qf the World War'lI
constituted the fru its of viqoryand partial, reparation for the devastation
wrough:t by the Nazis duringtheWar.
,I
", eAfter the Washin.gtonConference on Holocaust ,Era Assets, Russia
apparently agreed to permit the restitution ofart and other treasures to
countriesand individuals who were victims of Nazi aggression. Restitution
depend's on access to information.
'
3. Privacy'laws.
25
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
:
RECOMM~NDATION (11.(.3): Relax privacy raws that imped'e research relating to
the disposition of Holocaust era assets confiscated from Holocaust victims .
• The Nazi Wa~ Crimes Disclosure Act exempts from disclosure by
the;Nazi War Criminal Records Interagency Working' Group records that
would-
" ... (A) constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
,
(B) reveal the identity of a confidential human s'ource, or reveal
information about the application of an intelligence source or method, or '
,reveal the identity of a human intelljgence source when the unauthorized
disclosure, of that source would clearly and demonstrably damage the '
national security interests of the United States;
(C) reveal information that would assist in the development or use
of weapons of mass destruction;
(D) reveal information that would impair United States cryptologic
systems or activities;
(E) reveal information that would impair the application of state-of
the:"'art technology within a United States weapon system;
I
(F) reveal actual U~lited States military war planst,hat remain in
, effect;
"
(G) reveal information that would seriously and demonstrably
impair relations between the United States and a foreign government, or
seriously and demonstrably undermine ongoing diplomatic activities of
the: United States;
(H) reveal information that would clearly and demonstrably impair
the current ability of United States Government officials to protect the
President, Vice President, and other officials for whom protection,
ser~ices, in the interestof national security, are authorized;
(I) reveal information that would seriously and demonstrably impair
current national security emergency preparedness plans; or
0) violate atreaty or international agreement."
26
.. ,
�~ecbmmendations package -, June 30 DRAFT
eeln applying these exemptions, the Act provides that it
.,
I
shall be presumed that the public interest will be served by
.
.'
"
disclosure and release of the records and that assertion of an
exemption may only be made when the agency head determines
that disclosure and r~lease would be. harmful ~o a specific interest
identified in the exemption ..
e When the audit of an income tax return or an estate and gift tax
return discloses the existence of Holocaust-Era Art of a certain declared
. value, that value is reviewed bY,Art Appraisal Services which could check
the; art against the databases but~venif a match was found, privacy laws
I
'
. "
' .
.
wo~ld preclude the IRS from disclosing the name of the taxpayer.
III.
MISCELLANEOUS
A. Amnesty
RECOMMENDATION (liLA): Grant a general amnesty to'anyone possessing a
stolen and unrestituted Holocaust era asset who gives a sufficient notice of the
.; .
loc,:ation of the asset and agrees to return it upon demand by the original owner
,
-
'
or his legitimate heir.
B. Immunity from seizure
,
.
RECOMMENDATION (lII.B): In the interests of locating and identifying stolen
Holocaust Era Art, revise seizure laws to provide sufficient immunity to permit
the free flow and public display of such art.
"
i
eThe federal Immunity From Seizure Act (IFSA) grants the power of
immunizing foreign loaned works of art to the President or his designee
(Carter des,gnated the United States Information Agency (USIA)).
,
.
,eeUpon an application for federal pr~tection, and provided
the works are found to ,be of such cultural. significance, as to be in
27
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
the national interest, a note to this effect is published in the
Federal Register and the borrowed works are immune from civil or
criminal seizure in the United States or its territories .
••The USIA application requires the borrower to certify that
" ... it has undertp.ken reasonable professional inquiry - inCluding
independent, multi-source research - into the provenance of the
objects proposed for determinations of cultural significance. The
applicant certifies further that it does not know or have reason to
. i know of any circumstances with respect to any of the objects that
would indicate the potential for competing claims of ownership.:."
•• It has been noted that under this application, if it is '
necessary to allege that there are no possible claimants, then ,
.
immunity would be unnecessary and that the USIA should require
only that the applicant has'exercised reasonable care in
undertaking professional inquiry- including independent~
multisource research, where applicable - into the proven~nce of the
objects proposed for determination of cultural significance and "
national interest.
,
,
,In the wake of the MoMA / Schiele case, the.New York Arts and
, Cu!tural Affairs Law (ACAL) was just amended to prohibit the civil seizure
of any work of fine art while en route to or from, or while on exhibition
by ,a nonprofit exhibitor.
,
.
'
,
•
I
•• No other state provides protective immunity for borrowed
art.
'.Although IFSA and the ACAL are similar. in many respects, there
are fundamental differences. Where IFSA requires an applicationprocess,
AC:AL is automatic. ACAL does not require that the artwork be culturally
important or in the national interest, only that it be borrowed from an' out
of ,state source and temporarily exhibited in New York for nonprofit
!
purposes ..
28
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
. I
29
�:,'
:;.
Recommendations
pac~ge
2
D
INITIONS
5
I.
- June 30 DRAFT
RESTITUTION
1
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
5
A.· Claims for identifiable assets in the United States
,
5
.1",;.
1. Statute of limitations'
7
8
9
4.
9
B. "Unidentifiable" assets in the United States.
Installations
2,
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
I
.
·9
C. : "Identifiable'" assets in the ossession of the United States in Euro
10
1. · External restitution
11
2.
12
D. Heirless assets
12
1.
13
2. Other cultural assets
looted outside of Germ
ternal Restitution
ue assets
,
14
E. State De
ment
3
�.',
Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
-15
F. Taxation
15
II.
SEARCH
15
A.
Databases
16
17
2: Claimant database
!
4
�Recommendations.package.'- June 30 DRAFT
21
,I
21 .
B. Documentation
21
1. :Provenance documentaton
21
23
C. Access
archives
5'
�Recommendations package June 30 DRAFT
23,
1.' National archives
24
2. International archives
6
�Recommendations package - June 30 DRAFT
27
7
III. MISCELLANEOUS
A.. Amnes
I.
27
B. 'Immun
from seizure
.,
i
,
!.
i
. !
,
7
�Recommendations package
iuly 11 DRAFT
INTRODUCTION
, The US Holocaust Assets CommissionAct [PL 105-186J requires·
this Commission to "submifa final report to the President that shall
contain any recommendations for such legislative, administrative, or
other actions as it deems necessary and appropriate."
The essential conclusion of the Commission's report on the fate' of
- Holocaust assets is that"given the magnitude of dispossessed property
located during and immediately after the war, little, if any, effort was
made to restitute looted assets and lost property rights to indivi~ual
victims.
,That is not to say that the United States made no effort to return
assets to the countries from which they were takennqr is it to say that
the United States lacked good reasonforfailing to make, restitution of
identifiable property to individual victims. Rather, it is to say that given
the political, military and economic demands on the United States at the
end of the war, restitution of individual property was not of primary
concern.
,
,
In 1998, the Congress expressed its concern for restitution of
individual property in the Holocaust VicHmsRedress Act [PL 105-158]: "It
is the, sense of the Congress that consistent with the 1907 Hague
Convention, all governments should undertake good faith efforts to
'facilitate the return of private and public property, such as works of art,
to the rightful owners in cases where assets were'confiscated from the
claimant during the period of Nazi rule and there is reasonable proof that
,
the claimant is the rightful owner."
,
'
Accordingly, these proposed ,recommendations address the
problems raised by the application of the prevailing policie's and praCtices
of the early post-war period and suggest ways to remedy those problems
,some half a century later.
1
�Recommendations' package - July 11 DRAFT
RECOGNITION AND REMEMBRANCE
.Foundation model
The Morris K. Udall Scholarship and Excellence in National
Environment Policy Foundation was established under ,PL 102-259 as an
"independent entity of the executive branch of the United States
Government" directed by a. board of trustees ir:Jcluding Presidential
appointees and statutory members. Forty million dollars were'
appropriated to the Udall Foundation to be invested by the Secretary of
the Treasury,' t~e earnings and income of which to be' used to carry out
the pu'rposes of the Fou ndation. "
. • Alien Property Custodian
Pursuant to a series of executive orders issued in 1941 and 1942,
any property within the United States owned orcon~rolled by a
designated enemy country or national thereof.could be transferred or
vested in the Alien Property Custodian (operating within the Executive,
Office of the President) as he deemed necessary in the national interest.
No exception was made for ·assets, belonging to foreigrinationals who
were victims of the Holocaust.
After the war, and until April, 1955; a Holocaust victim coul~ file a
'claim for the return of property taken by the Alien Property Custodian.
For various reasons, inCluding the expense and difficulty in filing, many
, victims were unable to submit a claim before 'the deadline.
2
�r
i
Recommendations package July 11 DRAFT
eProperty Control
under United States Military Law 52, property within Gen:nan
territory was subject to seizure by the United States Military Government
including "[p]roperty which has been the subject of duress, wrongful acts
•
•
<
of confiscation, dispossession or spoliation"whether pursuant to
legislation or by procedures purporting to follow forms of law or
otherwise ... " Restitution of this property within Germany ("internal
restitution") was the responsibility of United States Military Property
Control. from 1945-1949 after which it became the responsibility of the
. Office of the United States High Commission for Germ~ny.
•
"
·f
United States Military Law 59 defined the procedure for.
implementing the restitution of identifiable property that had been
transferred under duress during the N~zi regime. It promised "full and
speedy" recovery butthe regulations adopted by J?roperty Control
undercut both. Strict adherence to the December 31, 1948 deadline for
filing petitions for restitution (extended to May 1, 1949 for incomplete
submissions) together with the lengthy, cumbersome and expensive
procedure prevented many rightful oWners from asserting their rights.
eThe jewish Restitution Successor, Organization ORSO)
By legislation enac;ted in October, 1962, the Trading with the'
Enemy Act was amended to authorize the payment of $ 500,000 out of
the War Claims Fund to the jRSO as a lump sum settlement of all claims
for unclaimed property vested in the Office of Alien Property. The
, original legislation proposed $3 'million. ,
ejewish Cultural Reconstruction, Inc. OCR) .
In April, 1947, the jCR was appointed by the United State military
government in Germany (OMGUS) to act as trustee for the receipt and
. 3
�Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
distribution of Jewish heirless Jewish cultural property. OMGUS defined
heirless Jewish property as property that"no claims have been received
for and [for which] no identification of prior ownership can reasonably be
established."
'In August 1948, the United States Mili~ary Government in Germany
recognized the authority of the JRSO to petition for heirless and
unclaimed Jewish-owned property. To prevent duress property from
reverting to the German authorities, the JRSO petitioned for all potentially
.
,
relevant property resulting in numerous duplicate claims that tended ,to
subordinate individual property rights to cOl11munal pnes.
Assets
acquired by the JRSO were auctioned in New Yq~k and the proceeds were
used to support Jewish refugeeagencies:
.
I
.Customs refunds
;rhe International Refugee Organization (7) was required to pay
customs duties of at least $120,000 from 1949 to 1952 on assets
brought into United States to be sold for the benefit of the refugees ..
Legislation to refund these duties was proposed but never enacted.
",
.
:.
,.
4.
�'
·i
..
Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
CLAIMS
.National Holocaust Claims Processing Office·
.HPCO Model
The HCPO explains that it accepts claims from ~'[a]"nyone with
reason to believe that art belonging tothem or a relative 'was lost, looted
.
' .
.
or stolen betw~en January 1, 1933 and May 9, 1945," and that.:
,
"[i]nformation provided on the claim form is compared with provenance
data, insurance company·and museum records, Nazi confiscation lists,
auction cataloguesJ~nd other resources in an effort to locate the miSSing
work of art and aid .in its recovery."·
.Alternative Dispute Resolution
• Washington Conference
The 1998 Washington Conference Principles on Nazi:-Confiscated, .
'.
.
Art propose that nations develop processes to implement the principles·
"particularly as they'relate to alternative dispute resolution mechanism
l
5
�Recommendations package
July 11
DRAFT
for resolving ownership issues." In arbitration, a ne:utral third party (or
panel) who hears both sides and renders a binding decision. In
mediation, the disputing parties reach an agreement but cannot impose
. his decision on the parties.
; .British Model
'. Although residents of the United Kingdom, like those of the United
State.s~ were not subject to pillage by the Nazis, stolen art has found its
way into British museums. Thus, the United Kingdom has, ,established a
"Spoliation Advisory Panel" to consider claims from anyone (or his heirs)
who lost possession of a cultural object during the Nazi era (1933-1945)
where the object is in the possession of a United Kingdom museum or
gallery. The Panel will advise the claimant and the in~titution on what
,
action would be appropriate to resolve t,he claim. Panel recommendations
are not binding but if the claimant accepts the, recommendation, it is in
full settlement of the claim .
• American Model
The premise of the British Model, i.e., the claimed art is in the
custqdy of British national institutions, does not hold here., Thus, an
Amei"ican version of an alter'nativedispute resolution panel, would have to "
incorporate some means"of insuring participation by the cjJstodian or
possessor of the object for which a ~Iaim is being filed. For example, if a .
claim is determined by the NHCPO to be of sufficient credibility, then
federal law could provide that failure of the possessor of the claimed
j
.
' . '
•
object to respond to the claim in 'an NHCPO alternative dispute resolution
proceeding would result hl
[adverse publicity for the institution in possession of the claimed
object]
[the creation ofa rebuttable presumption, in the event the claimant,
proceeds to court, that the object belongs to the claimant]
[an award ofcosts and treble damages to the claimant should the
claimant later prevail on his claim, in court]. ~;
•
,
'.'
j\'
6
.\
�Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
.Time-barred claims'
.Alien Property Custodian
(2.3.1) Reopen the claims process for victims (or their
heirs) whose property was vested in the Alien Property'
Custodian and not subsequently returned
.Vested prope.rty
Pursuant to a series of executive orders issued in 1941 and 1942,
any ,property within , the United States owned or controlled bya
'
designated enemy country or national thereof could be transferred or
vested in the Alien Property Custodian (operating within the Executive
Office of the President) as he deemed necessary in the national interest.
No exception was made for assets belonging to foreign nationals who'
were Holocaust victims. After the war, and until April, 1955, a Holocaust'
victi,m could file a claim for the return of property taken by the Alien
Property Custodian. For various reasons,including the expense and
diffkulty in filing, many victims were unable.to submit a claim before the
deadline.
, • Litigation
(2.3.2) For those. claimants who chose to pursue their
claims for restitution of Holocaust assets in court; ,
.
.
'.
'.
provide by federal law for the suspension of otherwise
applicable statutes of limitations.
I
'
'
7
�Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
.Statute of limitations
,
A person may bring, an action in replevin to recover stolen goods by
alleging (1) his title or right the property; (2) that the property 'is
unlawfully detained; and (3) that the defendant wrongfully holds
possession.
A statute of limitations limits the period in which a plaintiff'
retains the legal right to assertaValid claim in court. If an action in
,
replevin is time-barred under a s~atute of limitations (generally two to
six years), the possessor of the stolen property has effectively acquired
title.
The waiver of the statute of limitations would apply only to claims
made for HOLOCAUST ERA ART, that is, any unique work of art made
before May 8, 1945 and that changed hands after January 1,1933, and
was or could have been in Europe between those dates.
Some legal precedent exists for Congressional suspension of state
stati.Jtes of limitations in clearly' defined circum'starices. - For example,
Section 11 f of the Bankruptcy Act of 1898 (replaced by the Bankruptcy
Code of 1978) provided for the suspension of the operation of any state
statute of limitations during the pendancy of bankruptcy proceedings.
By way of international precedent, the Matteoli Mission
,
,
recommends that "[i]n cases where property, the existence of which in
1940 is established, has been the subject of spoliation but has not y,et
been returned or compensated, compensation is a right irrespective of
,
.
any: statutes of limitations which may be in effect."
In addition, the
Committee on Culture and Education of-the Parliamentary Assembly of
. j
•
the Council of Europe, adopted a draft resolution on Looted Jewish
Cultural Property stating that in order to facilitate victim restitution,
legislation should extend or remove limitations periods .
• HOLOCAUST CLAIMS DATABASE
8
�·'
','
Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
.Due Diligence
, Minimal due diligence in any transaction involving Holocaust era
assets would require clearance from the Holocaust Claims Database as
the ~uthoritative source of information on outstanding claims .
• The Art t.oss Register (ALR)
1
The ALR maintaihs a private computer database of over 100,000
works of art that have been stolen or looted over the past 50 years some
,
,
of "¥hich is presumably HOLOCAUST ERA ART. ALR charges a feef6r
. searching its database
.LOOTED ASSET DATABASE.
.Existing lists
Reference may be made'to such existing lists as,those compiled by
the Germans for the Linz collection and the Goering collection and the
consolidated interrogation reports prepared during and after the war by
agencies and departments of the United States government .. The Office
of Special Investigations (051) in the Justice Department started to
9
�Recommendations package:" July 11 DRAFT
.
.
.
compile a comprehensive list of looted art but stopped work in March,
1998.
10
�Recommendations package
UNC~IMED
•
JLily 11
bRAfT
ASsETs
Matt~oli
Mission·
.
.
:. In the case of "heirless art;" the Matteoli Mission recommends·
leaving "despoiled works and objets d'art, or those of uncertain origin"
where they are presently located provided'that such location provide the
wide'st possible dissemination of a catalogue of despoiled works; the .
.
' .
museum install in the immediate vicinity of each work obtained through
spoliation or of uncertain origin, a regularly updated panel indicating the
available information as to the origin' of the work in question; and that an
Internet site be set up in each museum open' to the public and presenting
the works. obtained through spoliation or of uncertain origins, and
constant loop projection of these works.
'
11
�Recommendations package July 11 DRAFT
DOR~ANT ~CCOUNTS
.
"
.
12
�Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
,
.
PROVENANCE RESEARCH
• HOLOCAUST ERA ART DATABASE
.Full disclosure
, Although only some of, the HOLOCAUSt ERA ART located' in the
United States will have. gaps or suspicious gaps in provenance, all of it
I
should be included, with full provenance disclosure, to insure that no'
work is mistakenly omitted because, for example, of a seemingly valid
transfer, as referenced by the London Declaration of 1943 in which the
Allies warned that they intended to do their utmost to "defeat the
meihodsof dispossession" practiced by the enemy and, further, that they
.
.
reserved the right to declare any such transfers of property invalid,
including those "transactions apparently le,gal in. form, even .when
purported to be voluntarily effected."
.Standards .
Requiring the submission of provenance documentation gathered
by museums, auction houses and private dealers, et aI., to a single
HOLqCAUST ERA ART DATABAsE will make'"it possible to set consistent
sta:ndards for provenance research and full disclosure.
13
�,Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
• HOLOCAUST ERA ART DATABASE
(4.1.1) Convene,
by order of the
President,a HOLOCAUST
ERA ART TASK FORCE including representatives of public and
private organizations with an interest or expertise in the'
proposed HOLOCAUST ERA ART DATABASE to (a) determine
where the HOLOCAUST ERA ART DATABASE will be located
and'managed, (b) set standards for full disclosure, and (c)
define the format and procedures for maintaining the
HOLOCAUSTERA ART DATABASE.
14
�\
Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
eTask Force
The duration and composition 'of the Task Force would depend on '
wha~
other tasks are assigned to it.
ePriyate collections
(4.1.2) Enact an appropriate amendment to the Tax Code
providing'that no charitable deduction be allowed for the
donation of HOLOCAUST ERA ART valued in excess of $5000
unless it, was registered with full known provenan<.:e prior to
the claimed' deduction in the HOLOCAUST ERA. ART
'
DATABASE.
eTax deduction
.
,
In order to claim a non-cash charitable deduction of a work of art
valued in excess of $5000, the taxpayer must submit Form 8283 together
with a complete appraisal of the work.
eRe,search grants
eGrant program
15
�·
' .
Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
Research grants could be processed by (a) existing government
.' agencies suc"h as the Institute for Museum and UbraryServites or the
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, (b) the NHCOP, (c) the
HOLOCAUST ERA ART TASK FORCE or (d) an appropriate non
governmental organization (NGO).
,
.
'. .
16
�Recommendations package
July 11 DRAFT
LIBRARY OF CONGRESSv
11
�, Re'corrmendations package - July 11. DRAFT
'. NATIONAL ARCHIVES:
.National archives
.The Washington Conference Principles on Nazi-Confisc:;ated Art
The Washington Conference Principles recommend that "[r]elevant
records and archives.should be open .and accessible to researchers, in
accordance with the guidelines of the International Council on Archives"
and that "r]esolHces and personnel should be made available to facilitate
'the identification of all art th'at had been confiscated by the Nazis and not'
subsequently restituted."
.The National Archives and Records Administration
NARA has produced a "finding aid" (in book form arid on-line) to
locate records at the National Archives at College Part which focus
primarily on efforts to identify, recover and restitute assets hidden or,
stolen by Nazi Germany during World War II.
.Declassification· of records
.IWG
18
�Recommendations package - July 11. DRAFT
The Nazi War Criminal Recprds Interagency Working Gr<?up was
established pursuant to . the Nazi War Crimes DisClosure Act (PL 105-246)
.
. to "locate, identify, inventory, recommend for declassification, and make
available to the public at the National Archives and Records
Administration, all classified Nazi war criminal records of the United
.
,.
States," incltiding those that
.
" ... pertain to any transaction as to which the United States Government,
in its sole discretion, has grounds to believe...
.
(A) involved assets taken from persecuted persons during the
period beginning on March 23, 1933, and ending on May 8, 1945, by;
under the direction of, on behalf of, or under authority granted by the
Nazi: government of Germany or any nation then allied with that
government; and
; (B) such transaction was completed without the assent of the·
owners of those 'assets or their heirs or assigns or other legitimate
representatives."
'
"
.Lists of recently ~eclassified records are regularly posted on
NARA's website at http://www.nara.gov I research lassets .
• Destruction of records·'
(5.4) Review existing privacy law to harmonize individual privacy'
rights with maximum possible access to documentation necessary
for Holocaust era research .
• The Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act
19
�Recommendations package - July 1.1 DRAFT.
The Nazi War (:rimes Disclosure Act exempts from disclosure by
the Nazi War Criminal Records, Interagency Working Group records that
would-
. " ... (A)'constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy;
(B) reveal the identity of a confidential human'source,or reveal
information about the application of an intelligence source or method, or
reveal the identity of a human intelligence source when the unauthorized
disclosure of that source would clearly and demonstrably damage the
national security'interests of the United States; ,
(C) reveal information that would assist in the development or use
.' of weapons of mass destruction;
.
.
(D) reveal information that would impair United States cryptologic
systems or activities;
(E) reveal information that would impair the application of state-of
the-art technology within a United States weapon system;
(F) reveal actual United States military war plans that remain in
effect;
(G) reveal information that would seriously and demonstrably
.'
.
impair relations between the United States and a foreign government, or
seriously and demonstrably undermine ongoing di'plomatic activities of
the United States; ,
(H) reveal information that would clearly and demonstrably impair
the current ability of-United States Government officials to protect the
President,. Vice PreSident, and other officials for whom protection
services, in the ihterest of national security, are authorized;
, (I) reveal information that would seriously and demonstrably impair'
current national security emergency preparedness plans; or
U) violate a treaty or international agreement."
•• In applying these exemptions, the Act provides that it shall.be
presumed that the public interest will be served by disclosure 'and release
of the records and that assertion of an exemption may only be made
when the agency head determines that disClosure and release would be
.
,
harmful to a specific interest identified in the exemption.
20 .
�Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
, • When the audit of an income tax return or an estate and gift tax
return discloses the existence of Holocaust-Era Art of a certain declared,
value,that value is reviewed by Art Appraisal Services whi~h could check
the art against the databases but even if a match was found, privacy laws
would preclude the IRS from disclosing the name of the taxpayer.
"
I'
21
�Recommendations package- July 11 DRAFT
"
.
"
,
.
INTERNATIONAL ARCHIVES
(6) Convene an international conference at the highest leyels to address
issues of archival acc'ess and openness .
• Washington Conference on Holocausts-era Assets
In an appendix to the record of the Washington Conference on
Holocaust-era Assets, the Task Force for International Cooperation on
.
.
Holocasut Education, Remembrance and Research reported that
'
,
"On the specific issue of Holocaust-e'ra assets, an Internet
based international guide to archival sources is at present
being created, following discussions held at the London
Conference on Nazi Gold in November 1997 and the
subsequent proposal made by the United Kingdom in June
1998 at the plann~ng seminar for the Washington
Conference. An encouraging number of countries and
institutions have already made details of their. archival
holdings and access arrange'ments avai,lable on dedicated'
websites, linked by a central information site managed bythe
United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
(www.ushmm.gov(assets). "
In order to maxi'mize the effectiveness, of these
d~velopments in the field of Holocaust education',
remembrance, and research, the Task Force encourages all
governments and archival institutions to give furth~r
,cooperation and support to the microfilming projects run by
,
,
the United Sta~es, Holocaust Memorial Museum and Yad
Vashem; and to extend their contributions to the
international guide to archives on Holocaust-era assets to
include details of all Holocaust-related archival material. The
goal must be the widest possible dissemination of
•
j.
22
�\
Recommendations package
july 11 DRAFT
'information for the benefit of a!! those who wish to learn,
more about the Holocaust."
~International Conference on Archival Access'
eColJntries of Origin Restitution
e Post..:.war restitution
When the United States forces took possession of'looted aS,sets
after the war, the general policy, consiste~t with international law and'
prac'tice, was to return ide!1tifiable property to the country, of origin. To
varying degrees, the receipts for delivery of these assets to the countries
of origin required those countries to return the assets to the lawful
'owners. The~e. is no evide~ce that the United States'f~lIowed ~p on those
commitments.
.
Victims' assets recovered by the United States from the Nazis were,
in, effect, held in trust by the United States until they could be returned to
.
those victims. The United States, therefore,had (o'r still has) a fiduciary' ,
duty to the victims 'that may not have been flJllydischarged by returning
looted assets to the' country of origin.
"
,
23
�Recommendations package July 11 DRAFT
AMNESTY
(n) Grant a general amnesty from civil liability to f~rmer members of the
United Stat~s Armed Forces serving in the European Theater during World'
War II who may have taken and kept a Holocaust era asset if gives'a
sufficient notice of the location of the asset and agrees to return it upon
demand by the original owner or his legitimate heir.
IMMUNITY FROM SEIZURE .
(n+ 1) In the interest of locating and identifying stolen HOLOCAUST ERA
ART, revise seizure laws to provide sufficient immunity to permit ,the free
flow and public display of such art .
• Immunity From Seizure Act)
The IFSA (federal law) grants the power of immunizing foreign
.
.
loaned works of
to the President or his de~ignee (Carter designated
the United St,ates Information Agency (USIA». ,Upon an applic'ation for
. federal protection, and provided theworksare'foundto beof such ..
cultural significance as to be in the national interest, a note to this·effect
is published in the Federal Register and 'the borrowed works are'immune
from civil or criminal seizure in the United States' or its territories.
art
The USIA application requires the borrow~r to certify that
. " ... it has undertaken reasonable professional inquiry - including,', ,
independent, multi~source research - into the provenance of the,objects
proposed for'determinations of cultural 's'ignificance. The applicant
have reason to know of any,,"
certifies further that it does not know
circ;umstances with respect to any of the objects that would indicate the
potential for competing claims of ownership ... "
or
24
�Recommendations package - July 1'1 DRAFT
A less rigorous version of the regulation would require only
that the applicanthas exercised reasonable carei~ undertaking
professional inquiry- including independent, multisource research., where
applicable - into the provenance of the objects proposed for
"
determination of cultural significance and national int~rest .
"
• Museums
,",
"
<. .
• In the wake of the MoMA / Schiele case,the 'New York Arts and
Cultural Affairs Law (ACAL) was just amended to prohibit the civil seizure
of any work of fine art while en route to or from, or while on exhibition
by a nonprofit exhibitor.
•• No other state provides protective immunity for borrowed art .
• Although IFSA and the ACAL are similar in many respects, there
arefunpamental d'ifferences. W~ere IFSA requires an application process,
"AC~L is"autom'atic. ACAL does not require thatthe'artwork be culturally
important or in the '1ational interest, only thatit be borrowed from an out
·of state source andtempora"rily exhibited in New Xork for nonprofit
purposes.
25
�'"
.
....
Recommendations package - July 11 DRAFT
26
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets
Description
An account of the resource
<p>The Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets in the United States, formed in 1998, was charged with investigating what happened to the assets of victims of the Holocaust that ended up in the possession of the United States Federal government. The final report of the Commission, <a href="http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/pcha/PlunderRestitution.html/html/Home_Contents.html"> “Plunder and Restitution: Findings and Recommendations of the Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets in the United States and Staff Report"</a> was submitted to President Clinton in December 2000.</p>
<p>Chairman - Edgar Bronfman<br /> Executive Director - Kenneth Klothen</p>
<p>The collection consists of 19 series. The first fifteen series of the collection are composed mostly of photocopied federal records. These records were reproduced at the National Archives and Records Administration by commission members for their research. The records relate to Holocaust assets created between the mid 1930’s and early 1950’s by a variety of U. S. Government agencies and foreign sources.</p>
<p>Subseries:<br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Art+and+Cultural+Property+">Art and Cultural Property</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Gold+">Gold</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Gold+Team+Review+Form+Binders+">Gold Team Review Form Binders</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Art+and+Cultural+Property+and+%E2%80%9COthers%E2%80%9D+Review+Form+Binders">Art and Cultural Property and “Others” Review Form Binders</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Non-Gold+Financial+Assets+Review+Form+Binders">Non-Gold Financial Assets Review Form Binders</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=History+Associates+Binder+">History Associates Binder</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Non-Gold+Financial+Assets+Review+Form+Binders+%282%29">Non-Gold Financial Assets Review Form Binders (2)</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Financial+Assets+Documents">Financial Assets Documents</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=RG+84%2C+Foreign+Service+Posts+of+the+State+Department%E2%80%94Turkey">RG 84, Foreign Service Posts of the State Department—Turkey</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Financial+Assets+Documents">Financial Assets Documents</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?search=&advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=%5BJewish+Restitution+Successor+Organization+%28JRSO%29%2C+Oral+Histories%5D&range=&collection=20&type=&user=&tags=&public=&featured=&exhibit=&submit_search=Search+for+items">[Jewish Restitution Successor Organization (JRSO), Oral Histories]</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=PCHA+Secondary+Sources">PCHA Secondary Sources</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Researcher+Notes">Researcher Notes</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Unnumbered+Documents+from+Archives+II+and+Various+Notes">Unnumbered Documents from Archives II and Various Notes</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=RG+260%2C+Finance+Inventory+Forms">RG 260, Finance Inventory Forms</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Reparations">Reparations</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Chase+National+Bank">Chase National Bank</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Administrative+Files">Administrative Files</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=39&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=Art+%26+Cultural+Property+Theft">Art & Cultural Property Theft</a></p>
<p>Topics covered by these records include the recovery of confiscated art and cultural property; the reparation of gold and other financial assets; and the investigation of events surrounding capture of the Hungarian Gold Train at the close of World War II. These files contain memoranda, correspondence, inventories, reports, and secondary source material related to the final disposition of art and cultural property, gold, and other financial assets confiscated during the Holocaust.</p>
<p>For more information concerning this collection consult the<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/35992"> finding aid</a>.</p>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/35992" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/1040718" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
2954 folders
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[Recommendations Package - June and July Drafts]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Presidential Advisory Commission on Holocaust Assets in the United States
Art & Cultural Property Theft
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 225
<a href="http://clintonlibrary.gov/assets/Documents/Finding-Aids/Systematic/Holocaust-Assets.pdf" target="_blank">Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="http://catalog.archives.gov/description/6997222" target="_blank">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
6/24/2013
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
6997222-recommendations-package-june-july-drafts
6997222