Evening Star Newspaper, January 12, 1930, Page 81

THE SUNDAY STAR, WASHINGION, D. C, JANUARY 12, 1930. — How Love of Beauty and Craving for the Artistic Prompted Theft of Famed Ivory Diptych From Zagreb Cathedral by ““Tower Count” Who Could Not Resist Lure of Priceless Possessions. BY KATHLEEN READ. HEN criminals are brought be- fore the bar of justice and con- fronted with their misdeeds, many motives and contributory causes are alleged to have prompted their act. But in this commercial day and age one seldom hears, as an excuse for theft, that an irresistible urge to possess a thing of beauty prompted the crime. Yet this is the reason given by Count Pyelik Inna, now in custody of the Paris police for plun- dering the Zagreb Cathedral of the famous diptych, which eventually found its way into the Cleveland Museum, and other valuable art antiques. “Royal blood flows in my veins, and yet, be- cause I am an illegitimate child, I have been" -compelled to live the life of a peasant while a boy, and never to know the beautiful things to which I was born. Is it any wonder that 1 crave them now?” This was the lament of the “Cathedral Tower Count,” who is now awaiting extradition to Jugoslavia because his beauty-loving soul so craved the famous diptych that he pilfered it from the treasury of the Zagreb Cathedral. However, this love for beauty cooled sufficiently to permit of the sale of the treasure to an art dealer, forging the first link in a chain that reached through half the European capitals and finally stretched across the Atlantic to the Cleveland Museum. The diptych, a hinged ivory panel, is deli- cately wrought in gold, and the ivory carving depicts the life of Christ. It is one of the most famous examples of the goldsmith’s art and was formerly used as an altar piece in the old Eastern Church. For a year it was in the possession of the Cleveland Museum, which bought it from a New York dealer, who, in turn, obtained it from a European art dealer—all in good faith. Not long ago Dr. Leonidas Pitamich, Jugo- slavian Minister in Washington, called upon Frederic Allen Whiting, director of the Cleve- land Museum, and ‘convinced him that the diptych had been stolen from the Zagreb Ca- thedral treasury. Mr. Whiting straightway handed the ivory panel back to him, to be re- turned to the dim cathedral vaults in the Balkan country. So ends the diptych, so far as America is concerned, but out of the little country which claimed it and which is seeth- ing over the perfidy of the count has come one of the most intriguing stories of museum thefts. It seems a remarkable thing that a treasure so closely guarded could have been whisked right out from under the vigilant noses of the bishop and custodians and be gone for more than a year before the theft was discovered; yet that is just what the beauty-loving Count Pyelik Inna was able to accomplish. THE Zagreb Cathedral possesses mnot anly wide lands but a treasury far famed for its pieces of the goldsmith's art. The diptych, sought by and refused to many European mu- seums, was the treasure of treasures. This, together with jeweled croziers, miters and bish- ops’ rings, was safely locked away—safely at least to all intents and purposes. But the cus- todians had not reckoned with the count. He arrived upon the scene of action about three years ago—in the name of art. His ro- mantic history as well as his astute apprecia- tion of fine work and his beguiling manners won for him first the friendship of the old beliringer. Nothing wins the heart of a Euro- pean peasant as does the recital of one born in their own circle of life but who is entitled to wealth and a noble name. So it was with the court. Up until he was quite a lad he believed him- self the son of the peasant under whose roof he lived. But upon his deathbed this man confided to the boy that he was the illegiti- mate son of a noble sire living in one of the Dalmatian castles. Then the lad was able t» understand all of the differences in tastes and innate love for beautiful things that had set him apart from his neighbors. He fared forth to bave himself recognized and claim his rights, but without money or influence he was able to accomplish nothing. An Italian countess, knowing his story and believing him to be what he claimed, adopted the young man and be- stowed upon him the title of “count.” “So do you wonder why I have spent my life seeking beautiful things of which I have been deprived?” he ended. The old bellringer did not wonder, and he straightway consented to let the unifortunate young count occupy the tower room in the cathedral. Not only was the bellringer won, but also all those connected with the cathedral and treas- ury. The count played a wonderful confidence game and his finesse was perfect. He appeared to be a man of wealth and this impression he backed up by his gift to the cathedral of a very fine statuette. With the confidence of the cathedral chap- ter and the inside of the cathedral treasury won, the rest was easy. Up in his little tower Toom the count worked at an imitation of the famous diptych. It was a very poor imitation, but at least it was the same size, and when the propitious moment came to substitute it for the real treasure the act was accomplished with- out a hitch. 3 The crude substitute might have masque- raded for the original diptych for goodness knows how long—sometimes cathedral treasures have a way of thriving and growing valuable in dust and obscurity—had not a dealer who had once made an offer of $20,000 for th2 article and been refused learned that it had been sold to an American for $10,000. On learning this bit of news, the dealer who had made the offer of $20,000 resolved to make inquiries. He appeared at Zagreb and asked the cathedral chapter how it was that they had refused to sell the treasure to him instead of merely telling him that it was already sold. The cathedral authorities replied, to his great amazement, that the diptych remained in the cathedral treasury and that anything in Cleve- land purporting to be it must of necessity be merely a copy. However, when further investi- gation was made, it was revealed that the cathedral treasury and not the Cleveland Museum had the copy. This discovery led to a thorough examina- tion of the contents of the treasury, which re- vealed that it had been well plundered. The medieval miters were intact, but the valuable bishops’ croziers had been tampered with. Huge emeralds, diamonds and amethysts had been replaced with worthless glass. Bishops’ rings had been stolen, and many precious stones had been removed from other treasures and pieces of glass substituted. Police inquiries revealed that no stranger other than the count—who had disappeared very suddenly—had had access to the cathe- - dral collection. MUSEUM theft awakens Europe very quickly, but only after a most painstak- ing search was the count traced and brought to Paris, from whence he is soon to be sent to the Jugoslavian authorities. Meanwhile, he is trying to explain to those with whom he comes in contact that it was not the money but the beauty of the treasure itself that bewitched him. This may also explain the “lucky finds” of the count when he kept an art shop in Paris, prior to his cathedral activities—how the sword of the Croatian King, made in 1057, and an un- known Titian came into his possession. Yet each of these treasures that the count’s art- loving fingers yearned to caress—and did—was exchanged for prosaic coin of the realm. The motives behind museum thefts—at least those given—would furnish one of the most absorbing chapters in criminal history. Some- times it is patriotism, sometimes a vagary of ‘ the imagination, sometimes it is a woman. It was not a flesh-and-blood woman, but a pictured one, that lured young Perugia to tear Da Vinci’s famous “Mona Lisa” from the walls of the Louvre in 1911. Concerning this paint- ing, Michelangelo once said: “She is a strange creature whose looks promise unknown joys and whose expression is divinely ironic—Mcga Lisa is flirting with the world!” According to Perugia, she was flirting with him that morn- ing when he was at work, in the employ of a picture-cleaning concern, in the Louvre gal- leries. Her smile lured him, her eyes followed him from room to room. The lady in the gold Da Vinci’s famous “Mona Lisa,” ripped from its frame in the Louvre and lost for two years. frame compelled him to take her down. So said the young thief later. The accomplish- ment of the theft was a simple thing. A rip from the ancient frame, a disposal of the frame on the back steps, and out of the museum walked Perugia with one of the six most price- less paintings in the world under his coat. A frenzied two-year seatch was made before that “daring enigma” of painted womankind was discovered. Not because the picture itself lured him, but for vengeance’s sake, was the reason given by a young Italian for another Louvre Museum theft. Because art treasures of Italy had suffered at the hands of the conqueror, Na- * poleon, said the thief, for patriotic reasons they should be stolen back! There was also the theft of a famous dia- mond necklace from the Berlin Museum. The necklace had belonged to an empress. A young man named Patchsky loved a woman who, though she must wear peasant garb, had the tastes of an empress. The diamond necklace must be hers, decided the lover. He learned the trade of locksmith and became employed Dr. Leonidas Pitamich, Jugoslavian Minister to the United States (right), receiving the stolen Zagreb diptych from Frederick Allen W hiting, director of the Cleveland Museum which had innocently purchased it. Al R N O R CR 1L CRULITTRUE PR Y L P T S SEET RN N in the repair department of the museum. Me picked a flaw in a hinge of a case in which the diamond necklace reposed. When sent to fix the hinge he whisked the treasure off the vel- vet case, right under the very nose of the guard, and walked off with it under his coat. Coats seem to be handy things around museums! Patchsky didn't get very far with the necklace for his beloved, but his stay be- hind prison bars was an extended one. One of the most daring thefts of national treasures ever perpetrated was accomplished by a woman. It took place in Dublin Castle and was declared to be a sort of sleight-of- hand performance. A guard stood near her all the time, but when she had left the room the magnificent jeweled snuffbox was gone. It is one of the few stolen museum treasures that have never been recovered, although art dealers have been on the lookout for it for years. One of the most sensational thefts which have ever occurred was that of the great Indian dia- mond, the Regent, which was carried away in an apple and only located when a hungry chambermaid bit into the fruit in the thief's room at his lodging. ‘The adequate guarding of art treasures is one of the greatest problems which confront museum authorities. Small articles have a way of disappearing, and it takes the resourceful- ness of a large force to insure their safety. . Many museums display paste imitations of jewels, while the real ones are safely stored away. The crown jewels of France are the subject of constant concern. They are on display in Paris, protected by the latest devices known to science. A veteran custodian of European treasures, George Bergloff, says that tapestries seem to be especially tempting to woman museum thieves, One so skillfully wrapped a priceless Gobelin tapestry under her fur coat last year that she almost got away with it. When one remembers how vigilant and ever watchful the guards seem, it is difficult to imagine how any one would attempt a theft in a museum, but it is being done almost daily, avers Mr. Bergloff. AN Italian art dealer, commenting recently upon the theft of the Zagreb diptych, made a strong plea for a more careful guarding of the treasures of Europe, not only from museum thieves but also from art dealers who will sell them to America. “The situation in the art world is alarming, for fully seven-eighths of the art treasures in the European markets are going across the ocean to America,” said the art dealer. “The dissolution of great European art collections goes on without end. America now houses one- sixth of the works of Rembrandt, besides such treasures as the Cowper ‘Raphael’ and the ‘Blue Boy.’” He pointed out that the enforce= ment of the present law against the sale of cer= tain treasures is difficult because of the “ine adequacy of the inspectorial staff and the mule titude of chapels and churches rich in art.” (Copyright, 1930.) [ LW At aseh®