Archives Scrapbooks

This image displays a yellowed newspaper clipping mounted on a plain, off-white sheet of paper. The clipping is from the Christian Science Monitor, dated June 19, 1946, as handwritten in black ink below the clipping.

The headline of the article reads:

Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit

The article details a legal dispute filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington of Westchester, Pa., against Harvard University. She is seeking damages for the loss of a valuable painting, “Descent From the Cross” by Rubens, which she had entrusted to Harvard for inspection, but which allegedly disappeared while under their care.

Key points from the article:

• Mrs. Darlington claims she purchased the painting from the Tesaro family in Antwerp in 1921 and exhibited it in European galleries before sending it to Harvard’s Fogg Art Museum in June 1940.
• Five days later, she alleges the painting was given by Harvard to a Newbury Street art dealer without her knowledge, after an X-ray examination deemed it an “excellent 17th-century reproduction.” She claims this dealer falsely represented himself as her agent.
• In 1943, she requested the painting’s return and learned it had been passed to a Boston art dealer, who then reportedly stored it in a private gallery in Dartmouth Street. That gallery went out of business during WWII and its paintings were returned to owners — though the Rubens reproduction allegedly was not among them.
• Harvard officials are described as “tight-lipped,” with one admitting they’ve “known about the missing painting for a long time.” William H. Claffin, Jr., a member of the Harvard Corporation, noted that action to address the matter had been “in progress for several years.”
• Mrs. Darlington’s attorneys argue that several art authorities in Philadelphia believed the painting to be the “genuine original.”
• The case was expected to be heard in the Suffolk Superior Court, where the court would first need to determine if Harvard, as an educational institution, could be held liable. If so, the court would then set a price for the painting.
• The article notes a historical custom among great artists of painting several pictures on the same theme or of students copying masters' works, explaining why it might have been difficult to identify authenticity.
• Private detectives were hired to search for the painting, but found no clue. Harvard officials claimed they knew nothing of the painting’s “mysterious disappearance.”

The clipping is neatly mounted with the paper folded at the top and bottom to secure it. The handwritten text below provides the source and date of the article.

In summary, the image shows a historical newspaper clipping detailing a high-stakes lawsuit over a valuable painting's disappearance from Harvard University’s custody, raising questions about institutional accountability and art authentication.

This image appears to be a clipping from a newspaper, specifically the "Christian Science Monitor," dated June 19, 1946. The article is titled "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit" and discusses a lawsuit filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington against Harvard University for the loss of a painting she believed was a Rubens masterpiece. The article details the circumstances of the lawsuit, including the painting's history, its alleged theft or misplacement by Harvard officials, and the ongoing investigations into its disappearance. The clip is pasted onto a piece of paper with handwritten notes at the bottom right corner.

This image is of a newspaper clipping titled "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit," published by the Christian Science Monitor on June 19, 1946. The article discusses a legal dispute involving Harvard University and a painting.

The article begins by stating that Harvard University officials were tight-lipped regarding a $100,000 lawsuit for damage to a mysteriously missing painting. The lawsuit was filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington of West Chester, Pennsylvania. The painting in question is a Rubens masterpiece titled "Descent From the Cross." Mrs. Darlington charges that Harvard University turned over the painting to another person without her authorization.

The article then goes into detail about the history of the painting. It was originally purchased from the Tesaro family of Antwerp and brought to the United States in 1921. It was later sent to the Fogg Art Museum at Harvard University for inspection in 1940. Five days later, the painting was given by the university to a Newbury Street art dealer.

Mrs. Darlington claims that the art dealer represented himself as her agent but had no prior approval to act in such a capacity. In 1942, she asked for the painting to be returned from Harvard and learned that it had been given to the Boston art dealer. A world-wide search for the art agent and the painting was then initiated.

The article concludes by questioning whether Harvard is liable for the missing painting. It states that investigators found former officials of the art gallery who explained that they knew nothing of the painting's mysterious disappearance.

The image shows a newspaper clipping with a headline that reads "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit." The clipping is placed on a piece of paper with a handwritten note at the bottom that reads "Christian Science Monitor June 19, 1946." The clipping appears to be an article about a lawsuit filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington of West Chester, Pennsylvania, against Harvard University for the loss of a painting worth $100,000. The article mentions that Mrs. Darlington had lent the painting to Harvard for an exhibition in 1940 and that it was later discovered to be missing. The article also mentions that Harvard officials have been silent on the matter and that the case is expected to come before the court unless it is settled out of court. The clipping is placed on a piece of paper with a handwritten note at the bottom that reads "Christian Science Monitor June 19, 1946."

The image shows a newspaper clipping from the Christian Science Monitor, dated June 19, 1946. The headline reads "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit." The article discusses a lawsuit filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington against Harvard University for damages to a missing painting by the artist Reubens. Mrs. Darlington claims that the painting, which she believed to be an original masterpiece, was damaged during its exhibition at Harvard. The article also mentions that Harvard officials have been silent on the case, and that private detectives have been unable to find any clues regarding the painting's disappearance.

The image is a scanned page from the Christian Science Monitor dated June 19, 1946. The page features a news article titled "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit". The article discusses a legal dispute involving a valuable painting valued at $100,000, which is missing and the subject of a lawsuit.

Key Details from the Article:

1. Headline and Context:

   • The headline indicates that Harvard University officials and private detectives are tight-lipped regarding the case, which involves a missing painting worth $100,000.
   • The painting in question is a Rubens masterpiece that was originally purchased by Mrs. Tessaro in 1921 and later brought to Harvard University for an exhibition.

2. The Painting's History:

   • The painting was originally purchased by Mrs. Tessaro and then brought to Harvard University in 1921.
   • It was exhibited in many European art galleries, where it was identified as an original Rubens masterpiece.
   • The painting was loaned to Harvard University by Mrs. Darlington, a former Harvard student, in 1942. It was given to the University to a Newbury Street art dealer, Alan Burroughs, who kept the painting in his gallery.

3. The Disappearance:

   • The painting disappeared after being exhibited at Harvard. Mrs. Darlington claims she had no prior approval to act as an agent for the painting and that it was taken without her knowledge.
   • Investigators have found no clues, and the case remains unsolved.

4. Legal Action:

   • Mrs. Darlington, through her cousin George A. McLaughlin, has filed a lawsuit against Harvard College, alleging breach of contract and conversion.
   • The case is expected to come before the Suffolk Superior Court in the fall, unless settled out of court.

5. Harvard's Position:

   • Harvard officials have remained silent on the matter, and the University is expected to argue that it is not liable for the painting.
   • The article notes that Harvard, as an educational institution, may not be held liable for the painting, which was loaned rather than purchased.

6. Additional Context:

   • The painting was examined by art authorities, who stated that several paintings attributed to Rubens were believed to be genuine originals of the famous scene.
   • It was customary for great artists to paint several pictures on the same theme, and the missing painting was one of these copies.

Visual Elements:

• The page has a clean, typed layout typical of newspaper articles from the mid-20th century.
• The headline is prominently displayed at the top in bold, serif font.
• The article is structured with subheadings and paragraphs, providing a clear narrative.
• The source ("Christian Science Monitor") and date ("June 19, 1946") are visible at the bottom right of the page.

Summary:

The image depicts a news article from the Christian Science Monitor detailing a high-profile legal dispute involving a missing Rubens painting valued at $100,000. The painting, originally purchased by Mrs. Tessaro and later loaned to Harvard University, disappeared under mysterious circumstances. Mrs. Darlington has filed a lawsuit against Harvard, alleging breach of contract and conversion, while Harvard officials remain silent on the matter. The case is expected to proceed to court unless settled out of court.

This image shows a newspaper article clipping. The article's headline reads "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit." Below the headline, there is a date and a source attribution indicating it's from the "Christian Science Monitor June 19, 1946."

The article discusses legal and investigative circumstances regarding a $100,000 lawsuit over a painting. Harvard University officials are mentioned as being tight-lipped about the suit filed by Mrs. Jean Butt Darlington of West Chester, Pennsylvania, claiming ownership of what is described as a "missing painting." The article includes details of the case, noting that a former ambassador, a William Bullitt, and Mrs. Darlington are involved, and it touches on the provenance and the history of the painting, as well as various efforts made concerning its situation.

The clipping is angled diagonally on a pale-colored background, emphasizing the text in a clear, readable manner. The article appears to be quite detailed, continuing onto another section which is not fully visible in the image.

The image is of a newspaper clipping titled "Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit." It reports on a legal case involving Harvard University officials who are tight-lipped about a $100,000 lawsuit filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington of Westchester, Pennsylvania, over a mysterious missing painting. The article details various aspects of the case:

• A Harvard University official mentioned that the university has known about the missing painting for a long time.
• William H. Claflin, Jr., member of the Harvard Corporation and Treasurer, said the university turned over the painting, "Descent From the Cross," by Rubens, for inspection but none without authorization.
• Mrs. Darlington, cousin of former Ambassador William Bullitt and mother of a Harvard student, is seeking damages for the mysterious disappearance of the painting.
• The suit, filed by her attorney George A. McLaughlin of Cambridge, charges Harvard College with breach of contract and conversion.
• The painting was originally purchased from the Tesoro family of Antwerp in 1921 and lent to Harvard University in 1940.
• Mrs. Darlington alleges that the painting was given by the University to a Newbury Street art dealer without her knowledge or permission, who misrepresented himself and did not have approval.
• She requested the painting's return in 1942 but was told it had been given to the Boston art dealer.
• A worldwide search for the painting was conducted, including locating the agent in England who had hung the painting in a private gallery on Dartmouth Street, but the gallery had gone out of business.
• Harvard officials say they knew nothing about the painting's disappearance.
• Private detectives also conducted a search but found no clue.
• It suggests the case may be decided by the Suffolk Superior Court and the painting's originality is in question, being possibly a custom piece by a great artist rather than an original Rubens.

To the right of the clipping is handwritten text stating "Christian Science Monitor June 19, 1946," indicating the source and date of the article.

This image shows a clipping of a newspaper article titled “Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit.” The article discusses a lawsuit filed by Mrs. Jean Bullitt Darlington against Harvard University concerning a missing painting valued at $100,000. The piece includes details about the painting’s origins, its disappearance, and the involvement of detectives and legal authorities. The institution is reportedly silent on the matter at the time of the article.

The text on the back of the clipping indicates that it is from the Christian Science Monitor, dated June 19, 1946. The article appears to be glued to another sheet of paper for preservation.

The image shows a scrapbook-style page with a vintage newspaper clipping mounted on a light background. The main clipping has a bold headline: “Officials at Harvard Silent On $100,000 Painting Suit.” The article discusses Harvard University officials’ silence regarding a legal dispute over a missing painting worth around $100,000, mentioning involved parties such as Mrs. Darlington and other figures connected to the case. There is a smaller clipping attached to the right, and a handwritten note on the background reads “Christian Science Monitor June 19, 1946.” The overall look is sepia-toned, suggesting old newspaper print.