The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1878-01-31
MIR. TIIDEN's INCOME TAX.
An Easy Victory for the Defense on the Very First
Count OF the Complaint.
FrOm the New York World. 2sd.l

An EASY flCIOrY TOT LIio Uoionho on tno WIZ Hiht
Count OF the Complaint.
From the New York World, 29d)
The income tax suit of the United
States vs.. Samuel Tilden, came before
Judge Blatchford in the United States
District Court yesterday on demurrer.
Mr.. Andrew ]. Vanderpoel appeared for
Mr.. Tilden and District Attorney Wood
ford for the United States. The first
count of the complaint sought to recover
SO 900 as tax on an alleged annual in
come of the defendant during the year
1861, with interest to June 90 1862, In
his remarks on this point Mr. Vanderpoel
said
"The demurrer is general. The de-
fendant is the only person upon whom
it has been attempted to impose or from
whom it has ever been attempted to col
leCt the tax for the year 1861. No man
has ever paid dollar of it. The execu-
tive officers who allow this suit to be
prosecuted, the District Attorney whose
name is subscribed to the Capias institute
ing the suit, and the gentleman now
holding that high Office, never have paid
one cent of income tax for that year, and
never have been asked to pay cent of
| it, and we may venture the assertion that
after the lapse of sixteen years they new
er expect to pay cent of it and yet it
was deemed expedient by District At.
torney on the day preceding his retire
| khak Agnna m YtNa N thIa
action. This suit was commenced on the
9th of January, 1877. The political an
mails tell us that at the time it was COM
menced Congress and the whole people
whether Mr.. Tilden, the defendant, who
| it was conceded had large majority of
| the popular vote for the Presidency, had
| been elected to that Office according to
the prescribed rules and modes of proce-
dure. 1t was not sectional question. 1t
threatened our peace. A great expert
ment was to be tried which should re-
lieve us from the peril. An electoral
commission had been proposed, and was
about to be Concurred in by both houses
of Congress, to which the solution of the
vexed question was to be submitted, in
the hope that the dangers which threat
ened us might be averted. The scandal
of the heated political canvass which had
slept two months was revived just at that
time, and two days before tie President
| approved the bill under which the COM
mission was appointed and acted, it was
blazoned through the party press that
one of the candidates against whom and
az ainst whose purity of life, respect for
law and reCtitude as a man no charge
could be found, was sued for income tax,
as if he had defrauded the Government,
when the instigators of the act we'll knew
he had in obedience to the law paid all
demands that had been made upon him.
The magnificent spectacle of a great peo-
pie submitting to commission and abid'
ing by its decision of the question who
should be its chief magistrate, with all
! the patronage and power incident to that
| position, is marred by prosecution such
as is here presented, and it will not sur
prise any one to hear that all the counts
in the declaration are utterly without
foundation in fact, and, as we hope to
prove them, unfounded in law. Admit.
ting as we do by our demurrer that this
tax for the year 1861 has not been paid,
we are ready to give reason entirely
satisfactory for it. That reason is that
the law imposing the tax has been re-
pealed. Under the laws of 1851 no Off
GERS were appointed by the Government
to assess or to collect the tax and on the
1st of July, 1852, before any attempt had
been made to assess or collect it, the Sec
tion of the law authorizing it to be i'm
posed were repealed by Congress-"
Judge BlatChford sustained the demur-
rer on this count, and the arguments on
the remaining eight counts was taken
up on the same grounds. District Attor-
ney Woodford argued an analogy be-
tween the present case and that of the
Dollar Savings Bank of Rhode Island,
decided upon appeal by the Supreme
Court of the United States in favor of the
Government Mr.. Vanderpoel contend
ed, in defense, that the duties of the as
SCISSORS were judicial in the case of an
income tax assessment, while in the bank
case they were purely ministerial. 1t was
not permissible upon collateral issue to
go behind the decision of the assessors,
and the Government was bound by their
declarations and decisions.
At $3.50 Mr.. Vanderpoel suspended his
argument and will resume on Saturday
morning next