 The diet of 1833 responded to that objective with a suggested model for lawmaking which would abolish the land-clearing tithes ( or "Novalzehnt") without compensation and lift the tithe on slaughtered animals ( or "Fleischzehnt") for a compensation of a fifteen-folding of one year's total, which would come half from the government treasury and half from the community from which the tithe was due.The resistance of the first chamber to these changes aroused Rotteck's greatest resentment.But when finally through compromises by both chambers a law, which had threatened to fail due to the resistance, came to a vote, Rotteck voted against the law since it didn't represent a full victory of the law of reason over the unseemliness of the historical law.