The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1876-09-01

Several days ago the New York Times pub
lished statement charging Samuel j. Tilden'
the democratic nominee for President, with
having committed perjury in making two sworn
statements concerning his income for the year
1862. The circumstances on which that charge
rests is somewhat as follows:
Under the Internal Revenue laws Mr.. Tildep
was called upon for the return OF his Income
for the year 1862. Blanks were furnished on
which TO set down the gross amount Of Income
from all sources whatever. These Blanks we're
filled by Mr.. Tilden, and the gross amount for
his income aggregated little more than four
teen thousand dollars. There were certain de-
auctions and exemptions authorized by the law
which aggregated near seven thousand dollars,
which substracted from the gross income, left
seven thousand one hundred and eighteen dol
lars as his net taxable income for the year
1862.
Some time within the past three years suit
was commenced against Mr.. Tilden and his
partners by the St. LOUIS, Alton and Terre
Haute Railroad Company, wherein it was sought
to recover from them large sums OF moneys
and stocks. Mr.. Tilden recently filed an an
swer to the matters set out in the Bill OF Com
plant under oath, and in which sworn state
ment he (Ilden) AYERS that he received from
A. C. Flagg. the Receivr Of said Railroad, the
sum OF twenty thousand dollars IN 1862 for
professional services rendered to Mr.. Re-
ceiver Flagg and the stockholders. This, it
will be seen, is but a single item Of Mr.. Til
denis income receipts for that year, yet it is
larger by six thousand dollars than his entire
income rs detailed by him in his sworn return
| for taxation.
The following extracts show the case as de-
tailed by Mr. Tilden himself in the two sworn
statements.
On December &C. 1868, Mr.. Tilden swore to q
return under oath, IN which he SAID
~ 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 proper
| ty, rents, interests, dividends salary, or from
| any profession, trade, employment or vocation
or any other source whatever, from the LIST day
January to 31st 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 81, 49,"
"In his answer to the complaint in the CIR
! cult Court OF the United States, IN the suit Of
the st. Louis, Alton d Terre Haute Railroad
| Company against himself and Others which an
swer was filed recently, Mr.. Tilden swore under
oath as follows:
That for such services the defendant Tilden
made charge of Ten Thousand dollars against
said mortgage Bond holders, and the said charge
was paid by or on behalf OF said mortgage
bond holders, oa the 18th Of October 1862
that the defendant Tilden, for part Of his
services aforesaid also made charge OF the
| like sum OF Ten Thousand dollars on account
| Of professional services rendered to the first
mortgage bond holders and the receivers, which
was paid to him by the said Azariah G.. Flagg,
and which payment appears under date
of November 7, 1862, in q statement annexed
to the first report aforesaid, as having been re-
ceipted for by the said Tilden, oh account OF
professional services"
Here appears the sworn statement Of Mr..
Tilden that his gross income for the year 1862
was but ga 900, and also the sworn statement
10y the same Tiden, in his answer to the bill
filed in the railroad case, that he had received
on the 9TH day OF November, 1852, two fees OF
ten thousand dollars each, or twenty thousand
dollars for professional services for the Stock.
holders and Receivers of the St. Louis, Alton
and Terre Haute Railroad Company. To say
the least, the facts act forth in the above ex.
tracts raise a suspicion of, if not perjury, dis
honesty OF so palpable and fragrant nature
as to destroy confidence in the integrity of the
man who unblushingly makes them.
1t is now more than a week since the fact!
on which this charge is based was laid before
the public, yet 1t has not been met or denied
The only attempt at explanation or paliatior
that has fallen under our eye, Is a statement
made by Mr.. Tilden's private secretary to
New York Herald reporter, which reads as fol
lows:
"a lawyer might work for long time be
fore he got his fee, and Conscientious NAL
would Of course consider the work he had don,
from year to year as case progressed, anC
that the fee. though received in one year, wa
not HE income for that year; it had been, II
fact, earned each year during the progress oil
the case. That was all there was about tn
matter"
To the mind OF any thinking man this is n,
explanation or denial OF the facts as statet
above. Il ID simply sort OF excuse by which
the force of this charge is sought to be broker
without meeting it fairly, II does not do ava
with the fact tha, Mr.. 1ilden stated under oat
In 1876, that he received November eth, 1862
go, 900 as a single counsel fee, and that OF
the 26th OF December, 1868. he returned, un
der oath, his gross income, from all sources
for the same year 1862, at the sum of onl,
$4,000.
The New York Tribune says this explanation
is " too thin, and the Detroit Tribune says:
6 1t is in direct opposition to the law, as fxet
by repeated decisions, and also to common
sense honesty No point in regard TO the ia,
on incomes has been more clearly settled thai
> that mans income for year is what he re
} ceIves IN that year, no matter whether b.
earned II that year or not. The construction
which the Private Secretary sets up would ena
bic the richest man in the country to ciphe
, down his income IN any particular year beyon,
the possibility OF Government taxation, II 4
not the law; 1t is not honest. and when tn
facts are thus conceded, and 80 lame an at
, tempt is made to explain them, the truth O
the charge is practically admitted. As the cas-
stands now, 1t looks as IL in the year 1862, a
least. Mr.. Tilden made and swore to falls
r and fraudulent return OF his income"
And the Chicago Tribune says =" that un
less Mr.. Tilden can truthfully deny and sue
1 cessfully demonstrate that he made one or tn
other Of these statements under oath, the con
, clusion is inevitable that he swore falsely ii
one or the other" Any other attempt thai
| LxsI