The evening times. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1895-1902, 1900-10-27
A BOTFICEL[I MYSTERY
Conviction of Prince Chigi Follow
ed by Conflicting Stories.
Speculation as to the Whereabouts
of the Celebrated "Madonna''-A
Monograph Issued by Count Plum
kett-The Arbitrary italian Law
Against the Sale of Works of Art.

possible in regard TO a picture SO famous
as the Madonna of Botticelli, long reek
oned among the chief giories of the Chigi
Gallery at Rome
The first telegraph announcement of
the conviction came to this country few
days ago without any particulars of the
transaction by which the distinguished
culprit had incurred the penalties of she
law. Next appeared in a Philadelphia
newspaper brief interview with P. A. B.
Widener, the Botticelli amateur of the
Quaker City, in which he expressed his
opinion that the Madonna" sold by
Prince Chigi in contravention OF Italian
law was not that which he (Mr. Widenerl
had recently purchased in London, which
includes, be ii noted, a figure of St. Jo-
seph, and which, its poss ssor is made to
say, lis the only one in the United
States
MIR Widener is quoted in the same in
teryiew to the effect that Prince Chigi's
customer was probably Agnew, the we'll
known London dealer. later cable des
patch from Rome, telling that the pun
ishment of the offending Prince had been
fixed al fine of SIS, 600 lire 1868 ,G00), Incl
dentally states that the BotticeIli lis now
in London
Conflicting statements and conjeetures
We're being made and the mysterious in
terest of the Chig BottIcelli was being
considerably deepened for the general
public while Count Plunketts monograph
on Sandro Botticelli, published in London
in the present year, was waiting. unno-
ticed. but ready to afford the following
account of the affair
About year ago the Botticelli Ma
donna IN the Chigi Gallery, long cele-
brated and disputed about becme the cen
ire of a small sensation in the world of
art. At that Tine Prince Chigi having
let 1t be known that he was willing to sell
the famous Madonna which few critics
had hesitated to ascribe to Sandro Botti-
cell, received an offer of s35, 600 from
some foreign collector, whose name has
not been published. Upon this offer 9TH
ers followed somewhat after the fashion
Of an auction. only without its publicity.
AT last t5e picture was sold for $50 goo
-(the exact amount OF the fine imposed on
few dayS ago upon the Princel-to an
! agent Of the Rothschilds. report said at
the time. In accordance with the Italian
law, the purchasers card, with a declara-
ton of purchase, was handed to the Min
lister of Public Instruction. but while
these prescriptive formalities were being
observed the picture itself disappeared.
1t has since Feappeared in the collection
Of Mrs j L Gardner. Of Boston"
This is, in substance. Count plunkett's
story of the disappearance, in the light of
which the soiutions of the problem of the
present wheTea bouts of the only Botticeili
known to have been in the Chigi collec-
! tion should not be far to seek. The pic
ture referred to by Count Plunkett and
that owned by Mr.. Widener are not the
same. The former contains no figure of
St. Joseph.
The law under which Prince Chigi has
teen convicted, and, jointly with his pur-
chaser, mulcted to the full amount of the
purchase money, is that by which the sale
of antiquities (using the term in a
classic sense) is regulated IL these parts
OF Italy which were the Papa1 States prior
| to September. 1870. This law, known as
the Pacca Edict, after the Cardinal who
| first devised it, is a relic OF Papai rule,
which the Italian Government has been in
no hurry to abolish. 1t provides for the
| granting of permits TO sell outside of the
Papal States antiquities" falling under
the description of precious which de-
scription has been defined by, the Roman
Court OF Appeals as meaning "of excep
tional value the export duty exacted as
condition antecedent to the granting of
the permit being 20 per cent The Chigf
sale was, by ali accounts. completed ana
the picture sent abroad without any such
permit and in this probably lies the
gravamen of the offence for which Prince
| Chigi now has to suffer The Pacca Edict
was, in substance, embodied in an act
passed by the Italian Parliament in 1871.
/ The export duty on these antiquities"
varies in different parts of Italy. generally
| following the provisions made in the diff
ferent political divisions before the era
of unifcation.
The hardship of the Italian law in this
I Nv
end with the exaction of export duties. 1t
does not seem at all certain, according to
General di CesD0la's view of the subject,
that the required permission would have
been granted to Prince Chigi, even IL he
had dutifully approached the Minister of
Public instruction with one-fifth Of his
sixty-odd thousand dollars. "Stat pro ra-
tione voIuntas mea" was the quotation
which General di CesnoIa thought applfca-
Bile in discussing the subject. The Italian
Government in his view, holds Itself per-
feetly at liberty to forbid absolutely the
expectation OF any work of art which it
may prefer should remain IN Italy. As
showing the strength Q. his convictions on
this point, he recalled his own experience
of a few years ago, when Prince Borghese
offered TO him. as representative of the
Metropolitan Museum Of Art, the famous
Borghese-T orlonia collection for $S.000.-
000 The condition OF the sale was that
and the Metropolitan Museum should get
it out of Italy as best might be.
He said I might have all the time I
wanted to nay the purchase money" said
the general. ''but l told him that I
wouldn't take his collection on those
terms If he would sell it for one Million
AS TO the equity of the Pacca Edict and
similar enactments when they first came
into force. there seems to be something to
be said in their favor, as well as against
them. Several of the great Roman fami-
lies. such as the Chigi Borghesi Massimi,
Ccl0nne, and one two others. reckon
among their lineage, direct or collateral
many Popes and still more Cardinals and
it has been argued with some show of
reason that many of the art treasures of
the great palazzi came there by the ex-
ercIss Of official power against the strict
rights Of the public. Thus. even apart from
the wider sense in which the works of the
great masters are regarded as the heir
looms of Italy, there may well be some
serious doubt as to the right of these
heirs of medieval despotism to sell their
historic collections as they would sell fur
nituro or bric-a-brac purchased at a last
years safe Owners of great works of art
in Italy can hardly complain if while they
share the distinction Of ownership with the
great families, they are obliged to share
their restrictions, for every law must work
hardship to a minority The more Just
ground of complaint seems to be that the
italian Government plays the dog in the
marger in preventing owners from selling
their works of art abroad when it remains