The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1876-10-05
Tilden's Income Tax.

time the New York Times arraigned Mr..
Tiden as 4 ''pcrjurer and swindler," in con-
ncction with his income tax returns. his at
torney has cssaycd Il defense. The effort
does not meet the charge. 1t is cvasivc, de-
ccptious. and false, and deepcns the guilt OF
Mr.. Tlden in prcmeditated act of defraud-
mo the government and violating the law.
The Times has distinctly accepted the issue
presented. and all who read chat Caper, and |
are acquainted with its ability, its accuracy, |
and IFS firm adhesion to its convictions, know |
what that means. We have forcible illus
tration OF its courage and character, in the |
exposure of Tweed. twas then met by the |
same kind of defense that is presented of
Tiden, but with persistent directncss it re-
peated its charges, piled evidence upon evil
dence. until the colossal frauds of the Tam
many Ring were laid bare to public gaze. It
promises the same with Tilden and his frauds,
and We may lool, for q complete vcrfication
Of the promise.
The following summary Of the defense is
taken from the Baltimore american. with
extracts from the Tribune and Times, show
ing the hoilowness Of the defense made by
'Filden's attornics. Sinott and Hewitt
The charge that Gov. Tilden defrsuded the
Government in the matter of his income tax
for 1862 is some six weeks old. He has not
chosen to make any direct reply to the accu-
sation, but we have something on the author-
ity OF Congressman Hewitt and Mr. Sinott,
the confidential law clerk OF Mr.. Tilden.
which purports to be the defense of the
Democratic Presidential candidate 1t is
characteristic of the thickness of Tillenism
that he does not venture the attempt to vim
tlicate himself per sonally. but turns the task
over to deputies, whom he may endorse or
repudiatc according to circumstances. After
all, this paper, which Is the Joint production
of Mr.. Hewitt and Mr.. Sinott does nos point
to the main controversy, but sltlrs it over.
Governor Tildcn in 1862 swore to an income
of Il little over $1,000. Afterwards he was
made party TO the st. Louis and Alton
Railroads.&c., and admitted the receipt in that
same year of two fees amounting to $780, 900,
and il is reasonable TO suppose that he must
also have received large sums in the same
wear from other legal business. 1t was
found that subsequently he made no returns
but allowed the Government to take his re-
turns for 1862 as a.basis and add to them 80
per cent. penalty prescribed by law in such
6uae, which is sustained by other competent
authorities, that in ''somc of these years his
income must have been over q quarter of a
million, and throughout the whole period it
must have averaged over 100000" These
are the naked facts. and Gov. Tilden does
not deny one of them, even in the document
which has been put forth through Mr.. IIew-
lit and Mr.. Sinott.
As stated by thc New York Times. the
charges against Mr.. Tiiden are thrce-fold,
and it is worth while to recapitulatc them.
They are:
ssFirst-That on December 26, 1863 he
swore to the correctness OF a return of his
income in 1862 which was not only ia Sc and
fraudulent and when tested by motor, ious
facts in regard to Mr.. Tilde.'s professional
earnings in that year, but which was proved
to he so by another statement made under
oath by Mr.. Tiiden in 1876. Seccad-That
Mr.. ridden made another obviously false re-
return of his income for 1868 on Nav 2G.
1864. Thrd-That in all the subsequent
years, save one. during which the income tax
was levied. Mr.. ,Filden failed to make any
return OF his income tax as required by law
int allowed himself to be assessed on an
amoiInt yery much below his actual earnings.
and that in so doing he adopted course
which was both unpatriotic and dishonest
- Mr.. Sinott's letter makes no answer to the
second charge, which is the most important
of all. The answer to the first charge is a
simple evasion Of the statement that in 1862
Mr.. Tiiden earned $4,000 for services rem
,tcred to the reconsideration of the PittsLurg,
Fort Wayne and Chicago Railroad. Mr.. Til
den was :aid this money. and when he
omitted it from his income returns he made
Oath to a deliberate lie. AS to the second
change it is not denied that Mr.. Tilden on
June 18th, 1869, received from the Cumber-
land Coal Company the sum of $1,000. 1t
makes 10 difference whether or not that
money was paid, Us Mr.. Sinott suggests Sin
settlement Of an old account and not taxa.
blc.'' II Mr.. Tilden had been an honest
man he would have included it in his returns.
and claimed it rs an set-offagainst the total of
his taxable income. That he did not is an
other proof of positive rascality.
The remainder Of Mr.. Tilden's defence is
equally unsatisfactory. He is forced to adj
NIT that he received $4,000 FROM the bond
holders Of the St. Louis. Alton and Terre
Iiaute Railroad in 1862, and the dates of the
transaction show that at least $4,000 was
paid for services in the same year. 1t is fur
Their understood that in 1862 he was paid
$4,000 by the Union Pacific Railroad Gem
pany. AS to the main charge it is not at all
doubtful that in this year, when Mr.. Tilden
swore to an income of only $1,000, his re-
ceipts were somewhere in the neighborhood
Of 100000. The great point, irrespective of
the exact figures, is that everybody knows
his income was much larger than the sum
upon which he was taxed.
It would be n matter OF small moment
whether Or not Mr. Tilden cheated the Gov
eminent in his income tax returns if he were
not candidate for President of the United
States. Occupying the position that he does
ic Mr. 20 LOFT
does not acqnit him of personal dishonesty,
and cannot dissipate the cloud resting upon
him. Mr.. Tilden can only do himself and
his party justice by coming out with plain
and straightforward statement-that is if he
is able to do SO. His shifts and eyasions create
an impression that is compelled to evade the
direct issue and is really guilty of the worst
that has been imputed him. Its not a very
pleasant position for Mr.. Tilden to occupy.
but he has only himself TO blame that he
stands in it.-BaHi,norc american.
The New York Tribune in closing its COM
mcnts upon the answer editorially says:
Gov. Tilden may, indeed, have kept him.
self within the letter of the law, but it is
plain that he evaded the spirit. lie could
not be sent to the penitentiary as he is try
ing to send Jarvis Lord, for defrauding the
Government, but he contrived to keep the
Government from getting out of him the
money to which it was entitled. He did not
tell the horse car conductor he had paid his
fare, but he kept his hands in his pockets
and looked unconcernedly at the conductor,
and the effect was the the same. When the
conductor detects such a passenger he gen.
orally wants co put him off the car. When
the American people find him running as
reform candidate for the Presidency, they
are going to vote for the other man.
After waiting so long, it is somewhat re-
markable that Mr.. Tilden should have at
tempted any defense at all; after attempting
it, nothing but Il conscious guilt could have
made his answer the contemplate fafrago of
half-truths and evasions which it is. We are
glad, however, that Mr.. Tilden has rested a
part of his case Oh simple issues of fact.
There we are quite willing to meet him, and
shall with all the haste which the examna-