Der Bote für TirolView original source

Controversy over the Relocation of the Wine Duty Office to Spondinig

Summary

In a reply from the Upper Vinschgau, court attorney Andreas Al. Hellrigl disputes the relocation of the wine duty office from Töll to Spondinig. He criticises the tax privileges granted to the Schlanders judicial district as unjustified, unconstitutional, and detrimental to state revenues. As an alternative, he advocates reducing the consumption tax on wine and spirits and retaining the toll station at Töll.

Full transcription

Extraordinary Supplement to the Tiroler Bote No. 31.

From the Upper Vinschgau, 3 Feb. (Rebuttal.) In the interest of truth and public opinion, we find ourselves compelled to raise an objection against the article from Meran dated 20 Jan., which was adopted from the Lloyd into the Tiroler Bote of 31 Jan. For while this voice speaks most laudingly of the transfer of the wine duty office from Thöll to Spondinig, and gives the impression that the feeling of satisfaction over the final resting point of this toll barrier — which wanders about like the Wandering Jew — were general, while the inhabitants of the Schlanders court district are rightfully laughing up their sleeves at the unexpected favour, all of North Tyrol recognizes in this decree a manifest violation of the primary constitutional principle of equal rights. Even if we do not directly shake the reasoning that motivated the favouring of the Schlanders judicial district in the decree of 25 Oct. of last year, and thus disregarding the fact that wine cultivation in the northern part of the Meran district and in the Schlanders district, of which scarcely a third practices viticulture, has since the year 1829 not increased to such an extent that an exceptional law would have been necessary for these parts, we cannot help asserting that of the wine produced above Thöll, not even 100 Yhren are transported past Schlanders, and to prove this truth we appeal to the testimony of all wine merchants and carters of North Tyrol and Vorarlberg.

The wine produced in the Schlanders judicial district is also consumed right there, and the more considerable the product of its own consumption is, the less is imported and taxed over Thöll, which is why the region grants itself the favour due to it on account of its own produce.

In the event, however, that a small quantity of the wine produced above Thöll were after all occasionally transported to the Upper Vinschgau, an inspection office in Laas, such as existed prior to 1829, could secure the proper revenue for the state.

If from what has been said the inadequacy of the motive becomes apparent that prompted the exceptional law for the Schlanders judicial district and the removal of the customs barrier from Thöll to Laas in the decree of 25 Oct. of last year, then it is truly incomprehensible how the most recent order can be justified and praised, whereby this barrier is advanced all the way up to Spondinig, thus placing a region where not a single grape grows into the enjoyment of an exceptional law justified by considerably increased viticulture — an order which, frankly and openly spoken, is a sin against the principle of equal rights, and a diminution of several thousand gulden from the income of the state!

And we believe we are not mistaken if regarding this decree we call into question the concerted action of the two high authorities cited in the reprimanded Meran article, since it has been reported that the tax commissioner intervening in the commission at Schlanders tabled a separate motion against this disposition. — Nature and history point to Thöll as the barrier where the beverage tax on the Vinschgau route ought to be levied; there, surveillance against smuggling is also easiest.

At the same time, however, we take the liberty of expressing our view that the greatest benefit would be conferred upon viticulture in South Tyrol, the wishes of the entire land best met, and an income certainly equal to the former excise secured for the state, if the consumption tax were reduced to one gulden per Yhre of wine and to three gulden in convention currency per Yhre of spirits.

We hope from our active and judicious high Ministry, in this branch of administration as in all others, the most beneficial decrees fully corresponding to constitutional principles and to our provincial interest, and believe we are not mistaken if we already now predict for this new Ahasuerus of ours — unless he should happen to receive a hawker's permit again — the order to march back to Thöll after an absence of one year.

Andreas Al. Hellrigl, Court Attorney in Tartsch.

Also this month

1849 at a glance

In 1849, extensive political debates regarding the Frankfurt National Assembly and the imperial constitution shaped events in Tyrol, accompanied by journalistic tensions between different regional parts. Locally, attention focused on tax issues, administrative matters in the Venosta Valley, and the citizens' trust in Mayor Haller. →

Cite & share

"Controversy over the Relocation of the Wine Duty Office to Spondinig." Der Bote für Tirol, 7 February 1849. https://digital.tessmann.it/tessmannDigital/Zeitungsarchiv/Seite/Zeitung/47/1/07.02.1849/152720/6. https://www.meran-archive.com/en/artikel/1849-02-07-kontroverse-um-die-verlegung-des-wein-aufschlagamtes-nach-spondinig