Dallas are not informed of Denney's death
Neither MOMAT, acting ostensibly as Denney’s agent, nor Denney’s executor
or his widow, informed the DMA of his death. The letter from Salvatierra
of August 22 1990 just mentioned shows
that this was not just an oversight, but that Dallas was being deliberately
misled into thinking that Denney was still alive. As a result, the DMA
thought Denney was alive until July 1991, fourteen and a half months after
his death.
Denney's widow proposes a deposit of pictures
in Toulouse, followed by a donation later
However between Denney’s widow in Salvatierra and MOMAT realism prevailed
from the outset: Anthony Denney was dead and well buried and there was
no doubt about it.
Long before the will had been verified and released by the Central Registry
of Wills in Madrid (19) , Denney’s widow appears to have been negotiating
with M. Mousseigne at MOMAT as if the estate had already been divided.
On 24th July 1990, well over a month before the release of the will,
she wrote to him to say that she was awaiting the publication of her husband’s
will (also see section 8) and that
she proposed, in the meantime, depositing the collection on loan and to
follow this with a donation later. She stipulated a sole counter-condition
that Toulouse take charge of the cost of transport, insurance and customs.
(See reference 20 below)
Denney's widow justifies forged correspondence
The widow, when challenged in 1993 concerning the Dallas correspondence,
made the following Court deposition in France (21):
"Attendu qu’après son décès, sa veuve, respectueuse
des voluntés du défunt, continuait en son nom une correspondance
avec le Musée de DALLAS, à propos de la valeur d’assurance
des oeuvres, mais surtout elle confirmait au Musée d’Art Moderne
de TOULOUSE, par lettre en date 24 JUILLET 1990, son voeu d’offrir la collection
de son mari, comme il l’avait lui même promis et dans l’attent de
l’ouverture du testament et de la regularisation administrative de sa situation,
elle proposait un depot temporaire des oeuvres avec comme seule contre-partie
la prise en charge des frais par la VILLE DE TOULOUSE."
"Given that, after his death, his widow, respectful of the wishes of
the deceased, continued a correspondence with the DALLAS Museum in his
name about the value of insurance of the works, but especially confirmed
to the Museum of Modern Art of TOULOUSE, by letter dated 24 JULY 1990,
her promise of offering the collection of her husband, as he had himself
promised, and in the expectation of the opening of the testament and of
the administrative regularisation of her situation, she offered a temporary
deposit of the works with the sole counter-condition of the CITY OF TOULOUSE
taking charge of the costs."
We can reasonably presume from the above that the widow definitely wrote
the letter of August 22 1990 . It should be noted
that she neither confirms nor denies writing the earlier correspondence.
City of Toulouse becomes party to concealment
of pictures from the Spanish authorities
On 8th October 1990 M. Mousseigne wrote a memo to the Adjoint Mayor
of Toulouse responsible for Museums listing the pictures that were to be
donated or deposited with promise of eventual donation.
However he also drew attention to a rather large rock of contradiction
on which the proposed donation might yet founder. Concerning some of Denney’s
pictures that were in the Paris residence of his widow (22)
he wrote:
"Madame
Denney souhaite aller du plus vite et pour ne faire d’erreur juridique
elle pose la question suivante, que je vous serais reconnaissant de transmettre
à notre service du contentieux: Comment une citoyenne britannique
(anglaise), résidant en Espagne, peut elle faire un testament en
vue d’une donation à Toulouse sans en faire mention en Espagne où
les oeuvres ne sont ni connues, ni déclarées?…"
"Mme Denney wishes to move as quickly as possible and, in order not
to make a judicial error, asks the following question, which I would be
grateful if you could transmit to our service for contentious matters:
How can a British citizen (English), resident in Spain, go about making
a will in respect of a donation to Toulouse without making mention in it
of Spain, where the works are neither known or declared….."
We may make the following observations on this memo:
From the Spanish viewpoint:
-
the widow has not included the pictures in her declaration of inheritance
to the Spanish authorities.
-
the pictures remain undeclared assets of her husband’s estate.
-
Conclusion: therefore the widow, not having claimed the pictures, does
not have title to them and has nothing she can give to Toulouse.
From the French viewpoint:
-
the widow is making a donation to Toulouse
-
She is entitled to do so as unique legatee of her husband’s will
Conclusion: therefore the widow can give everything to Toulouse
However, by telling the City of Toulouse firstly that the pictures are
not known or declared in Spain and secondly that the donation must not
become known in Spain, the widow is telling the City officials that the
pictures are undeclared assets of her husband’s estate and that she does
not have a valid title to them. By agreeing to help conceal the donation
from the Spanish authorities, the City is therefore accepting goods, as
if with a good title, while aware that the title has not passed to the
donor. The "Donation Denney" therefore is a myth - based on a camouflage.
City of Toulouse trys to buy
Alberto Burri's Sacco IV secretly from widow for 2 million
French Francs.
It has since emerged that the City has been trying to reward Denney’s widow
for her efforts in bringing the collection their way, by secretly buying
Alberto Burri’s Sacco IV from her for FFr
2M (23). La Dépêche du Midi, the
local daily, has cast further doubt on the donation myth by saying that 
"Burri’s
Sacco IV will be a sort of <<compensation>> for the generous donator.
An exchange of gifts"(24) Therefore it appears
that the "Donation Denney" is neither a miraculous gift from heaven as
is claimed (25), nor would the City have "betrayed
the interests of its citizens" if it had refused it (26).
The City would find it hard to justify the claim to have come by the collection
in the natural course of events and the expectation of a donation does
not justify the conduct of MOMAT. This is slightly reminiscent of the man
who said to the police when questioned how he had come by a horse: "I ain’t
done nothing wrong officer. I went out with a piece of string and an ‘orse
came back on the end of it."
Museum acquisiton policy in the light of the ICOM
Code
The ICOM Code (27) says:
"A museum should not acquire, whether by purchase, gift, bequest or
exchange, any object unless the governing body and responsible officer
are satisfied that the museum can acquire a valid title to the specimen
or object in question…"
The City knew from the prospective donor that the pictures were neither
known nor declared in Spain: they knew therefore that the donor’s title
was subject to significant limitations. Bearing in mind the ICOM Code,
one might have expected that the prospect of a donation would be approached
with some degree of caution. But this was not the case, as we shall now
see.
|
Section 4 References
19 The will was released on Aug 28 1990.
20 - Denney file MOMAT letter dated 24 July 1990
C.M. Denney to M.A Mousseigne.
"Dans l’attente de la divulgation du testament de mon epoux, et ainsi que
je vous l’ai precisé lors de tous nos entretiens, je vous confirme
ici mon voeu: d’offrir au Musée d’art Moderne de Toulouse, France,
la collection de tableaux d’Anthony Denney, mon mari, que vous l’avait
lui-même promis. En attendant la régularisation administrative
et juridique du second point, nous pourrions proceder de la manière
suivante: dans l’immédiat un dépot temporaire des oeuvres
à Toulouse, suivi d’une donation sous reserve d’usufruit. La seule
contrepartie qui vous soit demandeé est la prise en charge par le
Musée de Toulouse des frais de transport. D’assurance et de douanes.
Naturellement, la collection d’Anthony sera soumis a toute les clauses
de protection et d’ineliénabilité habituelles aux Musées
français……."
"In the expectation of the divulgence of my husbands will, and as I
have said during all our meetings I confirm to you my intention of offering
to the Modern art Museum of Toulouse, France, the collection of pictures
belonging to my husband Anthony Denney, that he himself promised to you.
While awaiting the legal and administrative regularization of the second
point, we could proceed in the following way: for the present a temporary
deposit of works to Toulouse, followed by a donation under reserve of usufruct.
The sole counter-condition that is asked of you is the taking over of freight
charges, insurance and customs by the Museum of Toulouse. Naturally, the
collection of Anthony will be submitted has all clauses of protection and
inalienabilty usual for French Museums ……."
21 Conclusions of C.Denney to the Judge of
Execution, Toulouse at the Audience of 31 March 1993 demanding lifting
of the Saisie on 38 pictures obtained by the Denney children
22 29 rue des Ste Pères, Paris
23 Alberto Burri's Sacco IV. On 26 April
1991, the Conseil Artistique des Musées de France gave a favourable
opinion on the proposal by the Syndicat Mixte gérant le Musée
d’Art Moderne to buy Sacco IV at a price of 2,000,000 F. Fr. "achat au
collectioneur" (Purchase from the collector). The collector was not named.
In a letter to A. F. Anderson of 6 December 1993 the Mayor Mr Dominique
Baudis confirmed that the picture was being bought from Mrs Celia Denney.
23a Further notes on Sacco IV
24 La Dépêche du Midi 29 March
1995<<Donnant-donnant>>
25 La Dépêche du Midi 18 Sept 1993 p
20 "La ville accepte le cadeau…" The Mayor is quoted as saying "On veut
nous donner cette collection, nous l’acceptons. C’est une grande chance
pour Toulouse d’avoir toutes ces oeuvres qui constituent un fonds magnifique
pour le future musée."
(Someone wants to give us this collection, we accept it. It is a great
chance for Toulouse to have all these works that constitute magnificent
collection for the future museum.")
26 Art Newspaper, Jan 1994. (with
permission from the Art Newspaper)
27 ICOM code is accessible via the Internet
at:
|
Paper presented for discussion
at the Institute of Art and Law Seminar on Art
Loans and Exhibitions, at the Courtauld Institute, London, May 13 1996
Web Pages and text © A.F.Anderson
1996, 1997, 1999
Version 2.2 May 23 1999
antonya@antonya.ace.co.uk
Section 3 - Index - Section
5 
"Burri’s
Sacco IV will be a sort of <<compensation>> for the generous donator.
An exchange of gifts"(24) Therefore it appears
that the "Donation Denney" is neither a miraculous gift from heaven as
is claimed (25), nor would the City have "betrayed
the interests of its citizens" if it had refused it (26).
The City would find it hard to justify the claim to have come by the collection
in the natural course of events and the expectation of a donation does
not justify the conduct of MOMAT. This is slightly reminiscent of the man
who said to the police when questioned how he had come by a horse: "I ain’t
done nothing wrong officer. I went out with a piece of string and an ‘orse
came back on the end of it."