Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1876-09-07
Tilden's Perjury.

This is the way the New York
Times responds to the fiimsy excuse
set up by T1LDEN's Secretary;
/. 1t is of no possible consequence
whether the services for which Mr..
Tilden was paid in 1862 were spread
over ten years or twenty. In point OF
fact, the second ten thousand dollars
were paid for services rendered in
1862, and the first ten thousand for
services rendered between 1859 and
1862.
2. So far from the dates of the SER
vices reconciling " anything, and so
far from the fixing of return of an
income with reference to the date
when it was earned being "a well
settled construction of the law" those
dates reconciled nothing, and the law
has by variety of decisions been
settled precisely the other way. A
mans taxable income in given year,
was what he received in a given year,
no matter whether he earned it in
that year or not The merest tyro in
law knows that, and Mr.. Tilden was
certainly not ignorant Of the fact.
8. Do Mr. Tilden's apologists ser.
iously wish it to be understood that
the fee from the ST Louis, Alton and
Ierre Haute Railroad waa Mr. Til
denis sole item of professional income
in 1862 +? He was standing counsel
for half a dozen other large corpora
tions, of which this was the poorest !;
he was President and Trustee of the
Balance Dock Company in this city !;
he held large mining interests in
Michigan, and he owned fair share
of the bonds and stock of the broken
down Railway Corporations, which
according to Mr.. Hewitt, he was en-
gagged between 1857 and 1860 in re-
constructing, 1t is very safe asser-
ton that in 1862 Mr.. Tilden,s income
was nearer 100000 than $4,000. 1t
is, moreover, an insult to public I'M
derstanding to pretend that Mr.. Til
den, who is to-day reputed to be
worth from five to seven millions, did
not defraud the Government in plac-
ing his taxable income at $7,1ls, for
it is admitted even by his defenders
that his most important professional
work was done before that time.
4. Now that the Tilden organs have
rashly attempted the business of ex-
PLANTATION, they must tell us how it
happened that their candidate made
no return OF his income during the
eight years between 1863 and 1872.
His gains and profit from all sources
certainly exhibited steady increase
during that period, and yet after the
imposition of the fifty per cent penal
ty for failure to make a return, he
paid tax on an average income of on
ly SIS, 900 a year. Either Mr.. Tilden
has earned nine-tenths of his fortune
during the last four years, in which
other people have been growing poor
err, or he grossly swindled the govern
ment out of its dues during all the
years when the income tax was a
public burden.
5. His answer to the Terre Haute
suit not only proves him perjurer
in 1862, but admits the subsequent
RECEIPT of bonds to the amount of
from $4,000 to 100000 on which no
income tax could possibly have been
paid.
Whether in the light of his recent
"defense," whether on the basis of
his own sworn statements, or whether
we regard the obvious differences to
be drawn from the we'll known cir
cumstances attending the growth of
Mr.. Tildens fortune, we must with
renewed emphasis, pronounce the
Democatic candidate for the Presi-
dency to be guilty of perjury and
fraud.