Perrysburg journal. (Perrysburg, Wood Co., O. [Ohio]) 186?-1965, 1876-10-06
Mr.. Tilden's Explanation.

Mr.. Samuel j. Tilden, the reform"
candidate, after waiting some forty days
TO see "whereunto this thing would
grow" has at length spoken, through his
friend and former law clerk Mr.. James
p. Sinnott. The letter was indited by
the latter yet no one can doubt that
Mr.. Tilden saw this letter before its pub
lication, If he did not actually write It,
and adopted it as his defense in regard
to the income-tax business The public
regard it as his answer to the charges
made against him.
The substantial facts in this case, al
legged on the one hand and not denied
but virtually admitted on the other, are
these: 1. That Mr.. Tilden in December,
1868, swore that his taxable income for
1862 was 81, ,11S, on which he paid a tax of
$213.54. 2. That in an equity suit
brought against him he swore in 1876
that in 1862 he received $50, 600, in two
sums of $4,000 each, as lawyers fees
for services rendered to the bondholders
of the st. Louis, Alton & Terre Haute
Railroad Company. 8. That, after max
ing return of his net income for 1868,
he declined to make any further returns,
with the exception of the year 1870,
when he paid tax on an income of
$14, 1854. a. That the average annual
amount for period of ten years on which
he paid anincome tax was about $15 900.
5. That during this period he was engaged
in transactions, professional and specula-
tive, which yielded him large income,
making him one of the millionaires of
this city.
10 oh Coz
and no pretense of denial on the part
of Mr.. Tilden or by his friends. The
pettifogging and negative letter of Mr.,
Sinnott, while it denies some of the items
of income in 1859 as stated in the New
York Times and evasively deals with
others, dodging between the period of
" receipts" and that of earnings" ac-
cordiDg as the one or the other will best
serve the purpose, nevertheless, leaves
these facts untouched and unexplained
They constitute the backbone of the
case, so far as Mr.. Tildens reputation
with the people is concerned. They are
the matters in regard to which honest
voters want light. The people wish to
know whether the reform" candidate
really did cheat the Government out of a
portion of its dues or not If he did,
then there can be no question that pri-
vate life is the position that he will best
adorn.
New, in respect to that branch of the
question which relates to 1862, and to
which Mr.. Sinnott devotes nearly the whole
of his special plea, we take the liberty of
saying to Mr.. Tilden and to all his
friends that the plain and simple thing
for him to do is to make clear state
ment of his "gains, profits and income"
in 1862, and another clear statement of
the deductions which he made from this
gross income and by which he brought
the taxable amount down to $7,11S.
There is no easier problem in figures
than this. Anyone who can add and
subtract is equal to the task. Put the
items of gross income into one column
and the items of deduction into another,
then add up The two columns, then sub.
stract the smaller aggregate from the
larger, and then the people will see how
Mr.. Tilden came to the conclusion that
his taxable income was only $7,11S in
1862. This he has not done; and yet it
is the sure and straightforward way of
making his record clear for that year, if
it can be made so, and it would just as
certainly expose fraud, rascality and
perjury, provided the facts are of this
character. While safe for honesty, it
would be a terrible ordeal for dishonesty.
And, since the question whether Samuel
j. Tilden was the honest man or played
the knave is before the public, and facts
enough are before the public to raise the
question, he may be assured that this is
the only mode of his extrication, pro.
vided he was as honest as he claims 10
have been. To shrink from it or to
dodge it by evasive pleading is virtual
confession of guilt,
AS to the other branch of the question,
what Mr.. Tilden has to do is to furnish to
the public rational solution of the ad-
mitted fact that, after making his returns
for 1868, he declined to make any further
returns except for the year 1870, and the
further fact proved by the figures that
for the whole period of ten years his
average tax payment was on an annual
income of about $4,000. Will he
assign to the public reason which COM
mon sense can accept for this declina-
ture? Does anybody outside of lunatic
asylum believe, if the estimate made by
the Assessor, with the so per cent. pen
atty added, had been too high, that Mr.
Tilden would year after year have sub
mitted to it and paid the Government
more than the facts required? Is it
possible, without stultifying common
sense, to escape the conclusion that the
declinature was Mr.. Tilden's way of
avoiding the payment of the Govern.
ment's just dues? This conclusion lies
upon the very face of the declinature.
Its truth becomes almost mathematical
certainty when we add the undisputed
fact that during this period Mr.. Tilden
accumulated the larger part of his i'm
mense fortune. His attempt, through
his friend, Sinnott, to gloss over this part
of the case with mere words is too trans
parently mere trick of words to pass
muster. The people are already in pos
session of too many facts to be deceived
by the trick.
No one can assume that Mr.. Tilden
was himself ignorant of the fact that
re was rapidly growing rich between
the years 1862 and 1879, or that he did
not fully understand that the aggregate
of his taxable income for these years was
largely in excess of the amount on which
he paid taxes. He knew the facts. He
could not possibly be ignorant of them.
And, if not ignorant, then he was not
ignorant of the fact that he was cheating
the Government. He was not ignorant
of the fact that the Assessors estimate,
with the so per cent. penalty added, was
far below his taxable income. He was
not ignorant of the fact that this esti-
mate was not forced upon him, but re-
suited from his own declinature to make
returns as required by law. He saw the
practical operation of this whole process,
and both adopted and accepted it be-
cause it kept in his pocket money which
ought to have gone into the Treasury of
the United States. If the opposite had
been the effect the policy would have
been different. Mr.. Tilden has no such
war record as to justify the supposition
that he would have pursued a course
that was constantly cheating himself.
The only conclusion admissible, in
view of the acknowled facts as they now