Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1815-12-02


lanls wthou,in any manner offending his
majesty. Prince Talieyrand promised me
an answer by the next evening but as /
did not receive it, | repaired to him in the
night, had second conference with him,
IN which he gave me TO understand that
the King wound give no orders upon the
SUBJECT, that might DO as thought prop
er, and negoci lie with MIR. Demon, the Di-
rector of the Museum. In the morning |
sent nay Aid Camp. Lieut.. Col. Free
mantle, to Mr.. Demon, who told him that
he had no orders 20 give up any paintings
out OF the Gallery, and that he should suf.
Ter none to be taken away but by force--I
then sent Col. Freemantle TO Prince Tai
ieyrand II acquaint him with this answer.
and to inform that the troops wculd go the
next morning at - O'Clock TO take possess
SION OF the paintings belonging to the king
OF the Netherlands, and To declare that If
any thing unpleasant should ar s. from this
measure, the kings minister's and not |,
were anSwerable for it. Col. Freemantle
likewise informed Mr.. Demon of the mea-
sure that was to be taken. il was,
however, not necessary to send any
troops, because Prussian guard constantly
ocoupit the gallery, and the pictures were
taken away without any assistance being
required from any troops under my COM
mand, except a few, who assisted rs Ia
bourers III the taking down and packing
up.
1t has been al.edged, thatb by having been
the instrument Of carr, ing away from the
gallery the pictures Of the king of the Ne
therlands. had been guilty cf breach of
a treaty which l had myselfma aud as
there is no mention made of the Museum
| IN the Treaty of the 25th Of March, and it
seems now the treaty spoken Of is the Mill
tery convention of Paris, it is necessary 10
show how this convention is connected with
the Museum.
do not want 10 prove that the allies
were at war with France; there is no doubt
their armies entered Paris under Militia
ry Convention, concluded with an officer
OF the government, the Project of the De-
partment OF the Seine. ard IN officer Of the
army, who presented both authorities at
thst moment. present at Paris, and en-
powered by the authorities &c negotiate and
conclude for them.
The article Of the Convention, which is
alledgcd to have been broken. is the 18th,
which relates 10 the pubiick property,
positively deny that this article has any
reference whatever to the Gallery Of Pain
| tings.
The French Commissioners introdu-
ced in the original project, an article to
| provide f1r the security Of this species
; OF property ; but Prince Butcher would
| not consent, sayi g there were in the gal
| lery paintings, which had been taken
from Prussia, and which Louis 18Th, had
| promised to restore, which, however, had
never been done. l repeated this circuin-
| stance to the French commissioners, and
| they prepared to accept tie article, with
| the exception of the PruSsian pictures, and
to this proposal, l answered, that | was
| there as the representative of the other
| nations in Europe, and that l must claim
for other nations. all that was conceded to
| the PrusSians. | added, that / had 20
instructions concerning the puse um, nor a
ny grounds how inc SoVereigns would act
that they would certainly urge that the
king should fluff! his obligations, and that I
advised the omission OF the article entirely,
and the reserving this afFair to the decis-
ions ofthe Sovcreigns when they should ar
| rive
Thus stands the afflir of the museum
in reference to tie treaty. The con-
vention of Parisis silent upon it, and
| nego1ilt!on took place, which left the
| eigns.
Taking it for granted. that the silence Of
the Treaty of Paris, of May 1914, respect
ing the Museum, had given the French
government an indisputable claim to the
pieces contained in il, it cannot be denied,
that this claim was aEnihiiated by this
| negoci ton.
Those who negoci-tcd for the French
| government, judged that the victorious ar
| mics had a right to take The works of art
from the Museum, and they therefore en-
dcavcured to save them by Introducing an
article from the military Convention. This
article was rejected, and the claim OF the
allies greatly advanced By the negotiation
on their side, and this was the reason that
the article was rejected. Not only then
was the possession Of them not guaranteed
by the military convention, but the above
mentioned negotiation tended the more to
weaken the right of the French govern
ment to the possession, which was founded
on the silence of the treaty of Paris, CT
May, 1914.
The allies having legal possession CT
the pieces in the museum, could do no
otherwise than restore them to thos.
from whom they had been taken away,
contrary to the usage of civilized war
fare, during the dreadful period of the
French revolution, and the tyranny of Bon
aparte.
The conduct of the allies with respect
to the museum, at the time Of the trea- |
ty Of Paris, must be ascribed to the de. |
sire to CRAFTY the French army, and to |
Confirm the reconciliation with Europe to |
which the army seemed at that time to be- |
disposed.
Rof tho circ,,met-rcro ora roovo o,.,.o