Strafella affair

The Strafella affair was a personnel -political dispute over the occupation of the general director post of the Austrian Federal Railways , which led to the resignation of the federal government Schober III on September 25, 1930 .

background

The term of office of the President of the Administrative Commission of the Federal Railways ended on September 30, 1929, which is why the government was considering future appointments to top positions. However, the matter was postponed until the constitutional reform was completed and a committee of ministers was set up to deal with the matter . At the beginning of March 1930, the Christian Social (CS) Vice Chancellor Carl Vaugoin informed Federal Chancellor Johann Schober that it had been agreed with the Landbund to appoint the Christian Socialist Franz Strafella as General Director and the Section Head Bruno Enderes, who was close to the Landbund, as President of the Administrative Commission. Schober intended to depoliticize the administration and therefore proposed that the former railroad minister Karl Banhans , who was not party to any party, be appointed president, Enderes vice-president and Strafella general director. Since Banhans and Enderes found Strafella technically unsuitable, it was planned to include the President and Vice-President on the board so that they would have Strafella under supervision. The planned second amendment to the Federal Railway Act should become the legal basis .

procedure

On March 15, 1930, Banhans was named president. The next day, the impending appointment of Strafella became known prematurely, whereupon the other directors of the federal railways declared that they would not be able to work with him. As a result, Banhans was unable to appoint Strafella general manager and made his post available (but did not resign). However, the Committee of Ministers wanted to stick to the personnel plans.

Strafella was now targeted by the social democratic workers' newspaper , which accused him of some past and allegedly planned misconduct. So there should be a "secret fund" at the Federal Railways, which " Mr. Rintelen's young man " should dispose of in the interests of financing the Heimwehr and election funds of the Christian Socialists. The stakes held by Strafella in local railways would make him unsuitable for representing the interests of the federal railways. In connection with the acquisition of his fortune in the years after the war , the Strafella newspaper accused “incorrectness” and “uncleanliness”.

Strafella then sued the editor in charge of the Arbeiter-Zeitung, Oscar Pollak , for insulting his honor. In parliament, the Social Democratic Workers' Party (SDAP) delayed the parliamentary deliberations on the second amendment to the Federal Railways, the federal law was not passed. The government decided on July 16 to ask Banhans to either appoint Strafella or step down. When Banhans refused to appoint Strafella, the newly appointed Minister of Commerce Friedrich Schuster could not bring himself to ask Banhans to resign. As a way out, Strafella was asked to await the outcome of the defamation process. Vaugoin found out about this from Strafella on July 22nd and the next day from the newspapers. He felt ignored, a crisis of confidence between Vaugoin and Schober was emerging. Vaugoin offered the Chancellor his resignation on July 25th , Schober did not accept it.

Schober stated that any appointment of Strafella would depend on the process going well for him. Vaugoin, however, said that it should be left to his decision after the process whether he would continue to demand the appointment. The trial in which Pollak was defended by Arnold Eisler lasted from September 17th to 19th. The verdict was issued on September 19, 1930: The Arbeiter-Zeitung was convicted on several points, but the court considered the allegations of “incorrectness” and “uncleanliness” to be proven and agreed with the newspaper on this point. Not only the Arbeiter-Zeitung, but also bourgeois newspapers such as the Neue Freie Presse therefore saw Strafella as "morally condemned" and reported on disreputable house deals during the period of inflation and that Strafella had hidden a large part of his assets from the tax authorities .

Nonetheless, Vaugoin wrote to Schober the next day requesting that Strafella be appointed. At the same time there was a conflict between Vaugoin and Schuster, in which it was ostensibly about special payments that Banhans had given three directors of the federal railways. Basically, however, it was about a crisis of confidence between Schuster, who took Banhan's side, and Vaugoin. On September 22nd, Chancellor Schober received an offer of resignation from both of them. At the meeting of the Council of Ministers on September 24, both of them actually resigned. In order to avoid a government crisis, the other members of the government urged a debate between the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor, which was scheduled for the next day. However, Vaugoin insisted on his resignation, which has now also been joined by the second Christian Social Government member, Agriculture Minister Florian Födermayr . With the resignation of the Christian Social Government members, the federal government had lost its foundation and the resignation of the entire government was decided.

consequences

The parties that had previously formed a coalition with the CS showed incomprehension about what was going on. The Greater German People's Party saw the end of the Schober government as politically motivated and as an expression of an irresponsible “party addiction”. The Landbund accused a “right wing” in the CS of having brought about the crisis frivolously in order to beat the next elections - they were to take place in the spring of 1931 - in a Christian social cabinet. After deliberations, both parties finally declared the coalition pact broken and were not available for any new coalition under Vaugoin. The anti-Marxist civic bloc was broken, which was not the aim of the CS.

The only thing left for the CS was the formation of a minority government , which immediately had to expect a vote of no confidence in the National Council . In order to forestall this she asked Federal President Wilhelm Miklas to dissolve the National Council and ordered the early election of the National Council on November 9, 1930 . This government, the federal government of Vaugoin , appointed Strafella General Director of the Federal Railways on October 2nd.

For the National Council election, Greater Germans and Landbund ran together with other small groups and under the leadership of Schober as the National Economic Bloc and Landbund ("Schoberblock"), while the Christian Socials tried to secure the support of the Heimwehr , which was now organized in the home bloc as part of party politics . The election ended with huge losses for the CS, they lost seven seats, the parties united in the Schoberblock lost two seats. The winners of the election were the SDAP with a plus of one mandate, as well as the home bloc with a first eight mandates.

literature

• Klaus Berchtold; Constitutional history of the Republic of Austria. Volume 1: 1918-1933. Springer, Vienna / New York 1998, ISBN 3-211-83188-6 , pp. 580-598, 611.

supporting documents

1. ↑ Why Strafella should become General Director of the Federal Railways. In:  Arbeiter-Zeitung , May 13, 1930, p. 1 (online at ANNO ).
2. ↑ Mr. Strafella is impossible !. In:  Arbeiter-Zeitung , May 15, 1930, pp. 1–2 (online at ANNO ).
3. ↑ Tomorrow's Strafella trial. Before the appeals court. In:  Arbeiter-Zeitung , May 17, 1931, p. 1 (online at ANNO ).
4. ↑ Strafeella directed !. In:  Arbeiter-Zeitung , September 20, 1930, pp. 1–2 (online at ANNO ).
5. ↑ Strafella morally condemned !. In:  Neue Freie Presse , September 20, 1930, pp. 1–2 (online at ANNO ).
6. ↑ What we have proven to Herr Strafella. In:  Arbeiter-Zeitung , September 21, 1930, p. 2 (online at ANNO ).
7. ^ The new board of the Federal Railways. In:  Wiener Zeitung , October 4, 1930, p. 6 (online at ANNO ).