Rightly so. This individual case may be tragic, but at some point you just have to say what is done is done and carry on, at least with regards to tangible property. Europe was torn asunder, millions were killed, and some people's stuff was misplaced. These four drawings are just the barest sliver of the tip of the iceberg. It is not possible to right all the wrongs of that era, but the British and the Allies paid the price in blood to stop the largest of them.
If this family has an issue, it is with the NAZIs or with the successor German government. The British Museum did not do the stealing here.
Look at it another way. If the sharp-eyed collector had not bought those items for the British Museum way back when, they probably would have had clown faces painted over them and been lost forever.
Correct, I believe the charge should be "Receiving Stolen Property".
I see your "at what point does it end" opinion but the gov't shouldn't be able draw the line just short of itself for the sake of "posterity".
So, does this mean that the Swiss banks don't have to give back the money that Jews deposited?
I think a better case can be made for recovering tangible property than any other reparation.
If one can prove ownership then it is like other cases of stolen property where the theft victim often makes recovery. Also museums are part of an ethical code of conduct that goes beyond the constraints of legal obligation. They do this because they are high on the victim list. It is like the Geneva Convention of the art world.