Controversy over the Conferral of Honorary Citizenship in Meran

To the praiseworthy editorial office of the Tiroler Bote.

Since the editors of the "Innsbrucker Zeitung" refused to accept the following reply, you are requested to publish it.

From the Adige. Reply to the inquiry addressed to public opinion in No. 144 of the "Innsbrucker Zeitung":

From the Adige, presumably from the spa town of Meran, an inquiry is addressed to public opinion in the Innsbrucker Zeitung as to whether a free municipality may bestow honorary citizenship upon a man of high merit and a beloved spa guest, especially when voted by unanimous consent of the municipal council, or whether it must first listen to objectionable insinuations of pre- and post-March clairvoyants, whose concepts of civic autonomy have a great elective affinity to next Monday's solar eclipse? We regret that the dreaded twilight of the impending solar eclipse has already had such a weakening effect on the optic nerves of the inquiring gentleman that he was no longer able to distinguish fundamentally different matters. In its generality, we can only answer the question in the affirmative, for where in the world should a municipality, even in despotically ruled states, not have the right to show its gratitude to a man of high merit and beloved guest, and to accord him the noblest thing it possesses, a part of its honour, the right of citizenship? Nothing can be objected to that; neither insinuations for nor against are needed. — But what does public opinion say about the specific case referred to in the inquiry? May a municipality, without dishonouring itself, bestow honorary citizenship upon a spa guest, however beloved, who in wanton company adorned and mocked the municipal coat of arms with a long pigtail and two elongated, pointed arabesques at the top, and who made the civic committee appear with donkey's ears in a public procession? May a mayor, who, rightfully indignant at the profanation of the municipal coat of arms, tore it from the wall with his own hand and put it into his pocket, later propose such a spa guest to the municipal council as a man of high merit for honorary citizenship without shaming himself? Can one speak of unanimity in the municipal council when, after what was indeed a unanimous vote, men from the municipal representation themselves declare that they had not agreed with the proposal, that they had known that the general mood of the town was against it, but had remained silent so as not to incur the hatred of a larger faction which naturally sees great merits in its beloved spa guest? Is not the whole act rather a persiflage of the citizens' honour, in which the high merits of the beloved spa guest almost find their justification? And finally, may voices that seek to preserve the honour of the town by pointing out this ongoing self-disgrace be called objectionable insinuations of pre- and post-March clairvoyants? — Yes, they may be objectionable; but let public opinion judge to whom!