The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1876-09-07

Inc OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES upon any I'M
partial; reader; is that Mr.. Mlden swore
falsely in one case or the other:,i The
only answer that we, can. conceive OF
as effective would, be to show that one
or the other 1T the two statements was
never made and sWorn. TO. by him.
This, it seems, it; is, moi. possible for
Mr.. Tilden to do, and, a defense .isss At
tempted which, was suggested II by j Mir
Tilden's private secretary, and has
been taken up by the Democratic news
papers with something like the despe.
ration which prompts drowning man
to clutch at a straw, Mr.. Tilden' s sec.
'retary says that "a lawyer might work
for long time before he got his fee,
and conscientious man would. of
course, consider: the work he had done
from year to year as a case progressed,
and that thu fee; though received III
one year, was not his income for: that
year ;. it; had been, in fact, earned each
year during the progress of the case.
That was all there was about the
matter" If this is all, that lis to be
said in explanation of Tilden's contra,
'dictory statements, it had better not
have been said at all. t.. +.s...<
The law required him to return his
actual income within. the, year ,--that
is, the money received from all sourr;c-
es, and It had been decided by tho
Courts oyer and, over again, that the
law Required just this. Mr.. Tj1den,
ia lawyer himself, could not have been
Ignorant of it. Besides, if he had been
earning this feesof $40, 900 in previous
years, did he return any part Of 1T las
his, income. before he received it !? He
could scarcely have done this, as it was
not an income until It came into his
hands, but, if not, then there was a
part Of his income on which he paid
no tax. That is exactly the point. He
swindled the Government and swore
to false return in; order, to do SO.
Mr.. Tilden's ''defense' seems also to
be based on assumption that in the
year 1862, when he swore his income
was ou So ,118, he had received nothing
but this single fec of: $4,000. This
will scarcely do. Did Mr.. Tilden get
no other fees for whole year, not
withstanding his, large practice AS a
corporation lawyer? Had he no other
1SSN0A CCosi uV4W At4oG6144u1uk u9 ut$U I'll.
ready amassed a large fortune 1t is
more probable that his income for the
year 1862 was 100000, the sc, 900
having been but a. single item but he
swore that twas only $7,ll8.
The theory of MI. .Tlden's ''de.
Tense" woald enable any man SO dis
posed to whittle his inceme down to
insigniicance.: The professional man
might with equal propriety MAINTAIN
that he began to earn his income of
this year when he was school-hoy. as
he there began the education which
subsequently secured him his income.
This is the reductio ad absurdum.
The simple fact is that sworn state.
ment has been found in which Tilden
admits that in the year 1862 he re.
ceived $780, 900 for services to one eli.
emit alone, and another sworn statement
in which he claimed, that his entire
income for that year was only 7,1l8,
And, to make the matter worse, one
of these sworn statements was made
for the purpose of .swindling the Gov
eminent out of its tax at time wher
its necessity was greatest. Yet the
Democratic party still desires the PEG
pie of this country. to elect this mar
the Chief magistrate of this nation! ::
Is there Bloody Shirt. or Is 1t Mythical Z