Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1876-09-26

by iesuitical evasion his manifest perjury
and fraud"
Judge Sinnott's explanation OF the S2o,-
600 which Tilden swore he received in 1862
from the St. Louis, Alton and Terre Haute
Railroad, namely: that most of the SER
vices were rendered prior TO that year. is
met by the statement that sixty-three
pages, or more than half of Mr.. Tilden's
answer to the suit OF the injured stock
holders, are taken up with the citation OF
legal instruments purporting to have been
made in 1862. To the denial that Mr..
Tiden received any fees, compensation,
or payments from the Chicago and North
western Company in the year 1862, the
Times replies that cit is not denied, how
ever, that he earned such an amount in
1868. and was paid for it in subsequent
year Judge Sinnott asserts that the To-
ledo and Wabash Railroad Company new
er was a client of Mr.. Tilden, and the
Times accepts the denial. After attending
in detail to the other explanations, the
Times says
1--WE must then after giving Mr.. Tilden's answer
all the weight which can be claimed for 1t, Iestate
the following among the items OF his income
ia 1862 from the following sources:
Pittsburg, Fort Wayne and Chicago Rallroad
Company $4,000
St. Louis, Alton and Tere IIaute Rail
road Company lo,ooo
pany So,oVo
Chicago and Alton Railroad Company 10000
Balance Dry Dock Company 1000
Total SIC, 900
We reserve the Cumberland Coal Company 5
pay ment Ifor further examination, and we must
add as a new charge that Mr.. Tldcn received IN
addition S2j, 900 from thh L oion Pacific Railroad
Company in that year, though when the amount
was earned we are as yet unable 10 say IL IS
not denied that his income from interest, divl-
dends, ETC., in 1862, was at least SlZ.UO, ana II
is tactly admitted that the expenses, repairs, and
taxes witch could be legally deducted from the
| gross income Of 1862 did not exceed the sum OF
5000. We submit that Mr.. Iiden's answer, IN
regard to this year. instead of dsproving the gen.
eral charge of the Times, furnishes very strong
presumption of its truth. When so little can be
said in defence, the case must be very bad one.
The Lines calls attention to the singu.
lar fact that no attempt is made to explain
how the exact figures Of S7llS were hit
upon for the income of 1862 In reply to
the excuse given for Tilden's neglect to
hand in any income returns for the series
of years following 1868, the Times says ::
Anything more dsingenuous or more thor
oughly characteristic of its author, it would be
difficult to imagine. Mr.. Tlden knows, as does
any man who has seen an income tax return, that
when annual income exceeded $40 600 and paid a
tax of five per cents any portion of such income
which was derived from dividends paid by corpor-
atoms which had previously paid the tax Of 3 per
cent. still chargable with the rate of per
cent on the retnrn Of the person by whom the
dividends were received. We do not hes tate to
| assert that from the New York Mine alone Mr.
Tildens income between 1865 and 1872 was not
less than yearly average of $4,000, being more
than double the amount of his average income
during these years.
After waiting so long it is somewhat remsrka-
BILE that Mr.. Tilden should have attempted any de-
fence at all after attempting it, nothing but con-
scious guilt could have made his answer the con
temptblc farrago of half-truths and evasons
which it is. We are glad, however, that Mr. Til
den has rested part of his case on simple issues
Of fact. There we are quite willing to meet him
and shall with all the haste which the examina-
ton of a mass Of legal and other records admit of
prove that he has attempted to conceal perjury by
talsehood, and to hide fraud by the arts of the
pettifOpger and the SINISTER"