Looted African Treasures - A British Prime Minister Responds
A response given by British Prime Minister William Gladstone
-----------------------------------------------------------------
On 30th June 1871, the British Parliament debated whether to provide 2,000 (UK pounds Sterling) to buy a crown and chalice stolen from the palace of the Abana, a ruler killed during the British military raid on Mogdala, a town in Abyssinia - now called Ethiopia.
The British Museum had sent a representative, a Mr Holmes, to make sure that only the most valuable treasures were looted by the soldiers.
Parliament was now being asked to raise the money to buy the looted treasures for the British nation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Gladstone said...he regretted that those articles were ever brought from Abyssinia, and could not conceive why they were so brought. They were never at war with the people or churches of Abyssinia... and he deeply lamented, for the sake of the country, and for the sake of all those concerned, that those articles, to us insignificant, though probably to the Abyssinians sacred and imposing symbols, or at least hallowed by association, were thought fit to be brought away by a British Army. He admitted that the Trustees of the British Museum had done their duty by dealing promptly with the application made to them; but he entirely dissented from the conclusion at which they had arrived.
In the first place, The trustees in their letter had apparently, through the use of an unguarded expression, gone far to sustain the declaration that these articles were impounded. The expression was that the articles were "secured" by Mr Holmes (the representative of the British Museum). Inasmuch as Mr Holmes had no authority to "secure" them, he, no doubt, merely suggested that the articles should be sent to the Museum, in order that the Trustees should have the opportunity of considering whether they should be acquired for the nation or not.
Still, the term was most unfortunate, and so also was the conclusion of the Trustees. Mr Holmes was truly described as an archeologist sent to Abyssinia. He perfectly remembered the discussion at the meeting of the Trustees, when it was determined to send out Mr Holmes, whose mission was with respect to really ancient remains, and had nothing to do with uncertified unexamined articles, as to which there was not a word in the letter of the Trustees tending to fix their value, their age, their country and their manufacture.
The Trustees said they (the crown and chalice) would constitute a permanent record of the most remarkable event of the present time - certainly a highly coloured description when they considered what events had lately marked the 19th century. But was it the business of the Museum to accumulate records of the of the most remarkable events of the present time? In Mr Gladstones opinion, it was the business of the Museum to do everything except that.
It was the business of the British Museum to acquire objects which would serve as sources of instruction, and tend to elevate the taste of the people. It was also the business of the Museum to accumulate objects of historic interest and instruction. Under which description did these articles fall? Who made them? Not a word of information was supplied on these and other points, but the Trustees of the Museum they would serve as a permanent record of the most remarkable events of the present time and, if we could acquire a piece of the ruins of the Column in the Place Vendome, that would be another such record. As to the delay which was complained of, his right hon. Friend (Sir Stafford Northcote) had not explained why the Government which received this explanation kept it six months without replying to it. His right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer was not to blame, because for some months after the new Government came into office he had no Papers whatever, and all records of the the transaction had disappeared. When in January, 1870, his right hon. Friend became acquainted with the facts, only a few days elapsed before he sent a perfectly explicit reply, to the effect that it was impossible the nation should pay a fancy price for articles of a very moderate intrinsic value. It was true he did not close the door altogether to any dealings upon another footing; but no modification or mitigation of the terms were offered, and he consequently declined to enter into the matter.
There was one element in this affair which was more agreeable - namely, Lord Napier's letter. With that just and kindly spirit which belonged to him, Lord Napier said these articles, whatever the claim of the Army, ought not to be placed among the national treasures, and said they ought to be held in deposit till they could be returned to Abyssinia.
It was rather a painful confession, because, if they ought to be returned, it seemed to follow that they ought not to have been brought from Abyssinia; but he must say that he agreed with Lord Napier. He saw in the Correspondence that mention was made of a probable reference to Lord Napier, and that might account for much of the delay, while the disappearance of the Papers might have been accidental. He could not consent, after consulting with his Colleagues, to the Address moved by the hon. and gallant Gentleman, because it contemplated the execution of the arrangement originally contemplated - that these articles should be purchased for the nation; and whatever became the property of the nation, to be added to the national treasures, could not, according to the law, be alienated to any other purpose.
If these articles were acquired it should be upon the basis described by Lord Napier, with the view of their being held only until they could be restored. He hoped the hon. and gallant Gentleman would be satisfied with the undertaking that they would look into the matter, with the object of doing that which was fair and equitable. he might have seemed to censure more severely than was justifiable some of those who had taken part in this matter; but such was not his intention. By a complication of accidents expectations had been raised which they could not fairly overlook.
Colonel North said, he was perfectly satisfied with the answer of the right hon. Gentleman; but wished to observe that the troops who brought away these articles had no means of leaving them in the charge of anybody in Abyssinia.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Hijacked African Treasures story of oneof the many exiled African artefacts