The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1876-09-23
III RETURN


rnI}EN (onIl RErUR q ]
ridge sinnost,s Exp sanation Of Them 4.
j COMPLETE MEDICATION OF THE n! G Z sl,I
Observation-Disclosures AIGNsToHY.s
aIIcaEssrtHIY@DIsPosED r0F-THE:RE~'
Tnprs CORRECTLY AND HONESTLY
MAnE--Tu DEN ASKED ANDREGEIyIEDtNo
.FAyORs FROM TIE GOV ERN oFfl-
GERS, BUT+PAIDRALL:lTHE 81 TAXES MI
POSED. I. q. PC. .'s.z 8 II
Judge James P. Sinnott, Of the Marine
Corrtsof New York, who. was in Mr.. Til
denis law office during. the entire period
~ the alleged delinquencies, has published
statement In reference to DIR. Tilden's IN
come returns, maintaining their correctness:
The Tribune gives the following synopsis Oh
the statement, and at seems to. em6ody sne
main points: Over one half OF Judge SIN.
motifs statement is occupied with detained
reputation of the charges that in the year
| 1852 Governor ,Iilden had received thirteen
severally enumerated items of.. lneo me- e,
mainly fees from railroads, amounting in all
| to Sos, 900. These,item Judge Sinnott eX-
amines In detail; prononnces some OF them
utterly and wholly fictitious, no such SER
vice having been rendered, and Governor
4 TiIden not even having been in the employ
/ Of the railroads at any time, the service
4 in others having !, been !, rendered; years
/ before the income. tax was Levied, ana IN
i stilI other cases having been, rendered
without fees. las the ITibune. has never
m,bIished these charges (all OF which seemed
f. II Somewhat reckless and questionableb
nor given, them editorial sanction, there -
no reason for wearying readers with Judge
i Sinnott's reply. Omitting these, the essen
4 tial part Of his, letter is the following: !,
4 Mr.. Tilden became counsel tor the hold
ers OF various classes OF bonds secured upon
4 the Pittsburgh, Fort. Wayne ana C9lcago
railroad, which was and i raliroaatFuu,
ming through four different states,, anu
/ huiIt in sections by three different corpora
lions. which were aiterward consolidated.
\ When MFR, Tilden became counsel Tor the
hondholders in 1859, it had outstanding
nine different classes OF bonds, upon all OF
i which default had been made, and its affairs
in general were in apparently hopeless bank
r,,Stcv and confusion. To rescue this en-.
}, terprise MIR. :Tilden labored continually and
much more laboriousIy than q. lawyer, ordl'
narily does in regard to any one particular
case from 1859 to the early part OF 1867.
The labor was particularly arduous during
4 the years 1860 and 1861.
:, SHIFTS OF foreclosure were instituted early
in each OF the States, and these mad 80 1ai
progressed by June, 1861, that DEGREES OF
foreclosure and sale Were then entered. Inc
, road was actually sold on the 24th OF Octo-
Der, 1861, and possession taken under Tue
sale, OF course this could not be accom-
pllshed until all the conflicting interests
the nine different classes OF bondholders,
the secured creditors, the unsecured creol-
tors, and the stockholders--had been mar
monized and satisfied; nor until Legislative
acts adequate to meet case such as nae
never before arisen, either here or IN Eng
land. had been devised, prepared, and sue
cessfully passed in four different States. All
this was accomplished principally under
4 the advice and with the labor OF. Mi. III
den before the close OF the year 1861. His
engagements on account of this railroad
during that whole period were constant and
engrossing. Whatever pay he received was
for the entire service asa Whole-lt was not
itemized OF apportloned. "..
The income-taX law went into effect ON
the 1st of January, 1862, and the incomes
falling under its operation were those nc.
cruins from and after the said 1st day OF
January, 1862. Income which had accrued
before that time was exempt from its opera
ton. q; ...a = .gi,..I>sl "a. ~,
/ I do not think it necessary to occupy
much time or space in discussing the legal
aspects OF this income question, or in sus-
tanning the right OF a citizen to receive ana
retain. free from income tax, moneys which
he had already earned by his own labor IN
years when no income tax existed.
The rule on this subject was early de.
cIared and promulgated by the Internal
Revenue Department itself, and Is in full
accord with these views. ",!ss n
In 1863 Hon. George S. Boutwell,, then
late Commissioner of Internal Revenue, pre-
pared 'sManual OF the Direct and sEXcise
| Tax System" which Mr.. Secretary Chase
officially approved and authorized. ~.
Under date OF May, 1863, this Manual
contains (pp. 273, 274) the following deci-
sion by the Commissioner OF Internal Revc-
nue.: na &.as s5.5. ~: 1'n /,
A merchants return of income should
cover the business Of the year 1862, eX-
Guiding previous years.
Physicians and lawyers should include
actual receipts for services rendered in 1852,
4 together with an estimate OF unreallzed or
contingent income due to that year.
In view of these decisions and official in
structions OF the Internal Revenue Depart
ment Mr.. Tilden's income return for 1867
was made up, so that, even If o different
view had since been authoritatively held and
expressed, Mr.. Tilden would stand COM
pletely justified. But there is no authority
for any different view. 80
Judge Sinnott next proposes to deal with
the original income-tax charge-namely, that
while in the year 1862 Governor Tilden re-
turned an income subject to taxation OF
/ 8, he has since sworn, in answer to an
Other, suit, to a. eceipt in TINT year from the
first and second mortgage b0ndholders of
the st. Louis, Alton and TeEre HATTIE Irail-
road of $4,000, 100000 having been paid
by the bondholders iof.e each Glass; Taking
up first the. charge Of q receipt Of $4,000
from the second, mortgage bondholders,
| Judge Sinnott|says: <II,su.lJLsSGE :yTi!:I
H.you will turn to page 37,i toliof Las, OF
I the answer in equity filed by the defend
ants, of, whom Mr. Tilden is one OF -four IN
q suit brought by the ST. Louis, Alton and
/ Terre Haute Railroad Company, you: will
| lind these words: t..t-Gl5T 4&W li.as3 H51 q
! That for such services the defendant Til
den made a. charge Of SIC, 900 against said
second mortgage bondhold ers, and the said
charge was paid by or on behalf Of said sec
ond mortgage bondholders on the 18th OF
October, 1862, out OF a fund contributed by
said second mortgage bondholders under an
agreement between themselves dated No
vember 1, 1852 sSs SAYS tss..T sG:ssEfY
Now, then, the question presents itsel5
What yyero fho Sc earpicar - for Juhipht this