Tate reconsiders Constable restitution (ctd.)
April 21 2015
Picture: Tate
The Mail on Sunday has more on Tate's recent decision to halt the restitution process of the above painting by Constable. Tate had been ordered to return the painting by the UK government's restitution panel - but last month said they had found new evidence about the picture's provenance. The Mail tells us that this includes:
Tate Britain chiefs believe the chance discovery of an export permit will bolster their claim that the 1824 oil painting – Beaching A Boat, Brighton – was legitimately brought to Britain.
The 1946 document bears the signature of a dealer called Karola Fabri and seeks permission for the transfer of artworks from Budapest to Zurich, including one by Constable identified as Fishing Boat.
The discovery of the permit in the archives of Budapest’s Museum of Fine Arts is the latest twist in an increasingly fraught dispute between the Tate and the descendants of the painting’s original owner, Baron Ferenc Hatvany, who died in 1958.
The descendants of Hatvany – believed to be two daughters and a grandchild – say the Nazis stole the painting and smuggled it out of Hungary.
The discovery of the permit in the archives of Budapest’s Museum of Fine Arts is the latest twist in an increasingly fraught dispute between the Tate and the descendants of the painting’s original owner, Baron Ferenc Hatvany, who died in 1958.
It turned up in Britain in 1962 and passed through several hands before being donated to the Tate in 1986.
The family launched a claim three years ago. The Government-backed Spoliation Advisory Panel, which rules on disputes over looted art, supported the heirs last year and said the Tate had a ‘moral obligation’ to return the painting. Sources close to the case say the export permit could prove the Tate’s claim that Hatvany voluntarily disposed of the painting while he was still alive.
The Tate does not dispute that the painting was looted by the Nazis but the gallery’s understanding is that it was returned to the owner after the war and then legitimately exported.
Gallery chiefs are expected to argue that the permit proves the work was still in Hungary after the war. But The Mail on Sunday understands the claimants will argue the permit doesn’t change anything as it does not identify Hatvany.
One source said: ‘If you had stolen the painting, you would still need to get an export permit to get it out of the country.’
