The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1876-09-21
TILDEN'S INCOME TAX.
A New Explanation but Not by
Tilden.

NEW YORK, Sept. 2O.-Abram S. Hewitt,
chairman of the national Democratic commit
tee, in a card to the public says:
Having appointed the I'd of Sept. to the Sec
income returns of Gov Tilden and Gov. Hayes
and received no answer, l addressed a note to
James p Sinnott, who was confidential law
clerk of Gov. Tilden during the whole period in
which the law imposing an income tax was in
force, asking him to examine the pretended ac-
count of Gov Tilden's income during the wear
1862 published by the Times, and furnish me
with such explanation in regard thereto as his
necessary familiarity with the details would
enable him to supply. have this day receiv-
ed his reply, presenting. a full and entirely
satisfactory refutation Of the charges of the
Times. His answer herewith submitted to the
public shows that out of thirteen pretended
items of income amounting to $110, 900, eleven
items amounting to 1884, 900 are wholly ficti-
tious, while of the other two only one of $1,000
is entirely true, and the second of 1926, 900 is
only partially true.
There is, therefore, no ground for the asser-
ton that the sworn return was not just and
accurate statement of the net income of Gov.
Tlden after making such deductions for losses,
interest paid and other charges as the law au-
thOrized him to make.
Judge Snnott's reply is very long and gives
the result of a detailed examination OF each OF
the items contained in the Times, alleged false
income return of Gov Tilden.. Each and all
false except the 18th and last item, VIZ: Salary
as trustee and president of the Balance Dock
Company $1,000, which is correct except as to
date.
AS to the item for services to the bondholders
of the st. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute railroad
Judge Sinuott says the services were rendered
in 1853, 1852 1860 and 1861. No considerable
part of these services belong to the year 1862.
The foreclosure proceedings in which they were
rendered had already reached decree III Au-
gust 1861, and the road was actually sold in
March 1862, so that there must have been at
least months of the year 1862 which could
not have called for these services, and as to the
interval between January and March 1862 any
lawyer will understand that this could not have
called for much service, being the time occu
pied by the running of the advertisement of
sale.
In respect to the allegation that after two
years of the income tax Mr. Tilden made no
return, but left that portion of his tax which
was in excess of the payments for his account
made by the corporations whose bonds and
stock he held, to be assessed under the law by
the estimate of the public officers, the answer
is simple:
The statute gave the taxpayer the option to
take that course, and good and honorable rea-
sons existed why scrupulous man should &C.
cept that option. Mr.. Tilden received not a
favor from the government officers and sought
none. He did nothing but pay all they impos-
ed on him.
Nearly all his income from investments paid
the tax through the corporations whose bonds
and stock he held without allowance of the
lawful deductions. On the residue after lawful
deductions were made he believes at the time
that instead of paying less he oftener paid more
than would have been the result of full but
troublesome accounting.