Evening Republican, Volume 17, Number 27, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 31 January 1913 — ART SCANDAL TOLD [ARTICLE]

ART SCANDAL TOLD

Dealer Successfully Deceives Italian Commissioners. Sells Them Imitation and Brags About the Affair Until He Gets Into Trouble, but Comes Out a Winner Financially. Rome, Italy.—A law was voted by the Italian parliament,, in June, 1909, for the preservation and defense of the artistic, historical and archaeological patrimony of the country. The object of this law was to prevent the smuggling abroad of art objects and old paintings, a practice'Which is resorted to by art dealers who find it more profitable to sell abroad instead of in Italy any article of artistic or historical value. The exportation of art objects is now prohibited by' law and it is only exceptionally allowed after the object to be exported has been examined by a special commission and a permit of exportation granted, in which case the would-be exporter must pay a tax amounting to 20 per cent of the value declared. The government commission is in every ease entitled to exercise the socalled right of pre-emption and acquire the object to be exported at the price declared by the owner. Recently the members of the government commission were instructed to exercise more care in the examination of art objects, especially old paintings, and to apply the right of pre-emption more frequently. Last year an art dealer submitted to the commission an old painting for'exportation, which he declared was worth only 12,000, desp|te the fact that he attributed it to the celebrated Dutch painter, Jakob van Ruysdael. The members of the commission immediately jumped to the conclusion that the painting was a genuine masterpiece of great value and suspected that the dealer had only set a low price on it in order to pass it off as a worthless, unidentified old canvas. They Immediately exercised the right of pre-emption and the painting for >2,000, announcing that it was a genuine van Ruysdael worth at least >20,000. The dealer pretended to be greatly disappointed, but as a matter of fact he sold shortly afterward another identical painting to an Italian collector for >15,000. He was so elated at his successful deal that he could not help bragging with his friends that he had "done” the members of the government commission, as the two pictures were the work of a Russian broken-

down artist who had specialized in faking old Dutch masterpieces. When this story leaked out a great outcry was raised and the press severely deplored the ignorance of the members of the commission who wasted the public money in acquiring worthless imitations of old masters. The case was brought before parliament and the minister of public Instruction appointed a special commission to examine the painting. Surely enough, within a week Professor Cavenaghl submitted the painting to a chemical test and ascertained that it waa modern and consequently faked. The dealer was threatened with criminal proceedings, but he easily proved that he was in good faith, refused to divulge the name, of the painter who sold him the painting on the plea that this was a professional secret and offered to take back the picture and refund to the government the >2,000 paid for It. - The scandal has been consequently bushed up. but, strange to relate, the dealer has not lost any money on the deal.