Occasionally such lists gave us important clues. There was one case in
1947 where a list which had played a part in some street corner deal
contained an item which seemed to match with one of the stolen
Linz paintings. It was soon found in the possession of a doctor
who swore that he had inherited it from his parents. Actually, he had just
acquired it from a piano maker, a rabid art collector, who in turn from
received it from a dealer in musical instruments. This person confessed
voluntarily, after some initial reluctance, that the piano maker had bought
from him not one, but nine paintings which, he felt sure,
were all looted ...
Not all chains were as long, nor was the outcome always so successful; there
was no way of telling beforehand. It was not sufficient to recapture a
painting, but in each instance the history of the case with all its
ramifications had to be
investigated. At times it took months before
enough evidence was collected to break a case ...
Except in rare cases, we made it a rule not to prosecute the people in possession
of stolen pictures. This policy was actually the basis of our success. An
individual could count on our leniency, provided he voluntarily gave up his
ill-gotten property and told us the whole
truth. Only when a person was
caught lying did we bring the case before a military court."
Edward Breitenbach
Chief, Monuments and Fine Arts Section
Formerly MFA&A Officer
For Southern Bavaria
Bad Nauheim, 30 June, 1949.