New-York tribune., 1904-09-25
THE ETHICS OF LOOT.
Questions Raised by the AscoG Cope
Controversy.

COHt|O OCC'O4'
Public sentiment outside OF Italy is by no
means unanimous In the opinion that ]. Pier
pont Morgan should comply with the demand
that he should restore TO the Cathedral at
Ascoli the cope which disa ppeared a couple OF
years ago from Its sacristy. and which acquired
by him in a perfectly legitimate way by pur-
chase from art dealers and professional coIec-
tors is now on exhibition with other Of his
treasures at the South Kensington Museum in
London. Especially in Great Britain is there a
pronounced feeling even among Roman Catho-
lies against any such act OF restitution. since
the cope is OF English workmanship, superb
specimen Of the Opus Anglicum embroidery. so
famous in medlaeval art history. and II is ar
gued that as such it would be more Just that
the vestment should remain IN England than be
returned TO Italy. True. the cope is known TO
have been presented by Pope Nicholas ". some
where about A. D. 1890. to the cathedral Of
his native town Of Ascoli. and TO have been pre-
served there ever since. But. according 10
English contention, there Is nothing but spec
uIatlop 10 show how IL was allowed 20 leave
Great Britain or how 1t came into the hands
Of Nicholas ". whose title to 1t may possibly
have been much the same as that OF Mr. Nor
gan: that is TO say. he may have acquired II
IN a perfectly legitimate way. by gift or pur-
chase although carried or from England by
improper means. II is considerations such as
these that have caused Mr.. Morgan to hesitate
about complying with the demand OF the Chap
ter Of the AscoH Cathedral. supported by the
1,a1,an government for the restitution OF the
cone Moreover. people are by no means agreed
as 10 the ethics which should influence his ac-
ton IN the matter. for past experience has
shown that in the extremely rare cases when
such restitution has been made by collectors
they have received gratitude for their
Ouixotic generosity. while there is no doubt that
II the arguments presented on the one hand by
the Italians and on the other hand by the Eng
ush In connection with the cope, were TO be ad-
mitted. and the possession OF every art treas
ure and historic relic determined by its original
titIe palaces museums and even churches in
Europe. as well as galleries. both public and
private I'm America would be stripped Of their
most highly priced belongings.
Thus the British Museum would be obliged to
restore to the Greek government the famous
Parthenon marbles known by the name Of the
seventh Earl of Elgin. The latter obtained them
in a perfectly legitimate way by purchase and
kent them for a time at his home in Piccadilly.
which led the poet, Lord Byron. to satrize the
mansion in question as
For all the mutilated blocks Of art
Later Lord Elgin disposed of them to the
British Museum where they have since been on
exhibition which. far from being matter Of re-
gret should on the contrary. be a subject OF
congratulation. For the possession of these
marbles by the British Museum has proved the
most eficacious means of preservation of some
of the grandest masterpieces of the plastic art
OF ancient Athens. the sculptures which were
left in their place at the Parthenon at the time
Of the conveyance to England OF those acquired
by Lord EIgin having been subjected since then
Ia fOf1 riAzQ nd
ton through lack OF proper care and wanton
destructiveness.
The Louvre at Paris. too. would be compelled
to return TO Spain the grandest masterpieces of
Murillo in existence-namely. his great paint
ing OF "The Immaculate Conception" which is
one of the glories OF Frances National Museum.
Although acquired by the Louvre in perfectly
legitimate manner-that is TO say, by purchase
yet IT had belonged for centuries TO the Hos
pital do Los venerabiles sacerdotes at Seville,
from where it was carried off by the French
Marshal Soult when the French King Joseph
Bonaparte was on the throne of Spain OF
course there is a certain difference between the
loot of a soldier and the plunder OF a robber
But sometimes the distinguishing line between
the two IS difficult TO define, and this was es-
pecially the case with all those art treasures OF
which the first Napoleon and his generals de-
spoiled public institutions, royal and private
palaces and even religious edlhces not only in
times of war but in those OF peace In the six
teen years that preceded the battle of Waterloo
in the second decade OF the nineteenth century
At the downfall OF the first French Empire and
the occupation OF Paris by the allied forces, the
latter at once took steps to resume possession
OF those OF their national chef d'ceuvres of art
and archaeology discovered In the Tutleries at
Fontainebleau. at Compiegne and In the public
buildings OF the Gallic metropolis. But by far
the greater part of the treasures. which had
either gone to adorn the private galleries Of the
Empsror's generals or had been disposed OF
by them-such as, for instance the entire col
lection OF Spanish old masters which Marshal
souit had carried or from Madrid and other
cities Of the Iberian psninsula-proyed beyond
recovery, and subsequently found their way
thrsugh several hands BY means OF sale. until