Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1876-09-08
"Is Gov. Tilden a Perjurer7p

but the context of the article seems fully
to warrant the question, and certainly
calls for direct answer and satisfactory
explanation from Mr.. Tilden. When aman
who is not running for President makes
two sworn statements that mutually con-
tradict and exclude one another, he is
generally characterized as a perjurer.
AS this is precisely what Mr.. Tilden
seems to have done in certain case, the
fact that he is the Democratic candidate
for President will scarcely relieve him
from the same judgment that would be
passed against an ordinary mortal, un-
less he possesses in more eminent de-
gree than has yet been developed the
Democratic faculty of harmonizing con-
tradictions.
The case is a simple one. The income
tax was imposed from the years 1861 to
1879, and the law required every one to
make a return of his income under oath,
which good, loyal citizens did. Mr.. Til
den made a return of his income for two
years only, and thereafter concluded it
was cheaper not to do so. The return
which he made for the year 1862, after
making the detailed statement provided
in the formula, concluded as follows;
hereby certify that the following is a true
and faithful statement of the gains, profits
or income of Samuel j. Tilden, of the city
of New York, and county of New York, State
of New York, whether derived from any kind
of property, rents, interests, dividends, sal
ary, or from any profession, trade, employ
ment, or vocation, or from airy other source
whatever, from the lst day Of January to 3lst
day of December, 1862, both days inclusive,
and subject to an income tax under the Excise
laws of the United States Income from all
sources, $7,1lS.
This return, of course, was sworn to
as provided by the law, and all that Mr.
Tilden paid tax upon as his income for
the year 1862 was the comparatively
small sum of $7,11S. But in his answer
to the lawsuit brought against him by the
st. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute Railroad
Company, which he has also sworn to, he
makes the following statement:
That for such services the defendant Til
den made charge Of $4,000 against said
second-mortgage bondholders, and the said
charge was paid by and on behalf of said
second-mOrtgage bondholders, on the 18th of
October, 1852; that the defendant
Tilden, for part of his services aforesaid,
also made Il charge of the like sum of $4,000
on account of professional services rendered
to the tirst-mOrtgage bondholders and the
receivers, which was paid to him by the said
Azariah G. Flagg, and which pay
ment appears under date of Nov I, 1862, in
statement annexed to the first report afore-
said, as having been recepted for by the said
lilden, "on account of professional sery-
ices"
Here we have Mr.. Tilden swearing
that in the year 1862 (when he swore his
entire income subject to tax was only
81, 118 he received in single case and
from a single company the sum of $20,
600, or nearly three times as much as he
had previously sworn to, without count
ing his other fees, salaries, dividends,
interest, rents or other income. ANY
theory that the amount of reductions
allowed by the law would bring his taxa
BILE income down to the low figure at
which he returned it under oath seems to
be dissipated by the fact that the total
exemptions figured up by himself in his
sworn return for the year 1862 were
$6,552. Deducting these exemptions
from the single fee of $4,000, it would
leave his net income for that year mot
counting any otherresources) $13, ,448, or
nearly double the amount which he act
ually returned. But the fact that he had
other resources, besides being self-evi-
ed by his returning in the year follow
ing an income from dividends and in
terest (outside of professional fees and
railroad jobs the sum of $4,000.
1t was during the years that inter
vened between 1861 and 1872 that Mr.
Tilden is believed to have accumulated
the larger portion of his vast personal
fortune, which is variously estimated at
several millions of dollars. During that
time, though he made sworn statement
of his income for only two years as re-
quired by law, he paid tax on an aver
age annual income of only $4,000. Yet
it was during this period that he was
"gobbling up" railroads, drawing large
fees from the Erie, giving the assistance
of his experience and legal advice to
Oakes Ames' Credit Mobiler for hand
some recompense, and otherwise storing
up those "bar'ls of money" with the aid
of which he now hopes to reach the
White House. In one transaction he says
that he and three associates made 1884
600 in mortgage bonds and $491 900 in
stock of the Terre Haute & Alton Rail-
road. We know from the testimony of
Mr.. Bayard, one of his associates in this
transaction, that in the year 1870 Mr..
Tilden received one-quarter of $131, 900
of the first-mortgage bonds with interest
which had accrued thereon during the
eight years previous. Was Mr.. Tilden's
entire income only SIS, 900 for that year?
This is the statement of the case on
which the New York Times bases the
inquiry, "Is Gov. Tilden a perjurer?"
1t is a question which, in view of the cir
cumstantiality of the record, he cannot
afford to ignore. If the circumstances
are as stated, then the conclusions are
inevitable that Mr.. Tilden, who now
comes before the country as patriot
and reformer, falsified his income re-
turns, cheated the Government out of
the proportionate share of the war eX-
penses levied upon him, accumulated
vast wealth while evading the taxes that
poorer but more honest men paid, and
finally convicted himself out of his own
mouth by swearing to receiving in a
single instance more than he had preYi-
ously sworn his entire income to be for
that year. We should think the Demo
Gratis themselves would exact an ex-
planation of this matter from their Presi-
Dental candidate, under the conviction
that the American people will not elect
to the Chief-Magistracy of the nation a
man who is suspected of low and animal
practices. But perhaps not; so long as
Tilden consents to use the "barls of
money" it may be that they will not
stop to inquire any further Chicago
Tribune.
The Democratic organs play discord-
ant tunes to the keynote OF Tilden's in.
come return for 1862 One treats il as
joke; another says Hayes would be justi-
fled in kicking any Democrat that went
poking around TO see how much tax he
paid; another says, what if Tilden did
swear to a false return?-there were
good many others who did the same
thing; another, authorized by Tilden's
private secretary, and therefore semi.of-
fetal, suggests" (Tilden never asserts,
unequivocally) "that Mr.. Tilden may
L0es sarasH fIs fsaasf,s fIo.,a.J