Rensselaer Union, Volume 8, Number 52, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 September 1876 — The Consequences of Electing Tilden. [ARTICLE]

The Consequences of Electing Tilden.

The discussion relative to Samuel Ji Tiiden’a contradictory statements under oath has been con tinea thus far to a mere exposition of the case and the interchange of opiuion on its merits. This was the natural drift of all reference to the alleged perjury pending the time when a denial might be expected from Mr. Tilden that he had sworn to (me or the other of the statements. But it is now more than a week since the discovery was made, and there has been no utterance on his part, except the theoiy of his private Secretary (probably advanced at the instance of Tilden) that the $20,000 which he swore was paid to him in 1862 was neatly earned in previous years. Thig is admitted on all sides to be no answer at all, since the law required a return of the gross income of the year, and since Mr. Tilden evidently so understood the law, as he made deductions in his return amounting to nearly $7,000 as warranted by the law. There is no longer any reasonable room for doubt, then, that Mr. Tilden made both the following statements under oath:

On Dec. 26. 1863, Mr. In his answer to the Tilden swore toaretum, complaint In the Circuit under oath, in which hi Court of the United said: States in the suit of the “ I hereby certify thatj& Louis. Alton A the following la a true] Terrs Haute Railroad and faithful statement of Company against himthe gains, profits or in self and ‘others, which come of Samuel J. Til- answer was filed recentden, of the City of New ly, MU Tilden swore unYork.and County ol New deroath as follows: York, State of New “That for snch services York, whether derived the defendant Tilden from any kind of prop- made a charge of ten erty, rente, interests, thousand dollars against dividends, salary, or said second-mortgage from any profession, bondholders, and the trade, employment or .-aid charge was paid, by vocation, or any other or on behalf of said source whatever, from second-mortgage bondlst day of January to holders, on the 17th of 81st day of December, October, 1802: . . . 1868,both days inclusive, that the defendant Tiland subject to an income den, for a port of his tax under the Excise services aforesaid, also laws of the United made a charge ol' the like States. Income horn sum of ten thousand dotall sources, $7,118.'’ lars on acconnt of professional services rendered to the first-mort-gage bondholders and the Receivers, which was paid to him by the said Azariah C. Flagg, . . . and which payment appears under date of Nov. 7, 1862, in a statement annexed to the first report aforesaid, as having been receipted for by the said Tilden, 'on account • of professional services.’ ” To those who profess to wonder why this discrepancy has only been discovered now, after fourteen years, it is sufficient to say that Mr. Tilden’s answer to the Alton & Terre Haute Railroad suit, of which the second statement is a part, was made within a few weeks, and it was in that sworn statement that he first convicted himself of having sworn falsely in 1862. It was not possible, therefore, to make exposure of the case before, and no one would have dreamed of charging him with perjury had he not himself made the accusation and furnished the proof. It is time now to consider the effect of electing a man President who has made two contradictory statements under oath, one of which shows that he swore falsely in 1862 in order to avoid the payment of” his proportion of the war tax. In the first place, the election of Mr. Tilden, so long as this charge stands against him, will be a confession that the public morals of the Nation have been so " debased as not even to revolt against common swindling and false swearing in the case of a man aspiring to the highest office in the Republic. It is not merely a case of swindling the Government, though that would be sad enough; but it is a case of actual perjury, which seems to be indisputably proved by the two affidavits on record. Such a charge substantiated in so direct a manner would, in a proper condition of pubiit morals, defeat the election of a man for constable ; how much more, then, should it operate against the candidate for the Chief Magistracy of a Republic of 44,000,000 of people ? If a man who confesses that he ommitted perjury in order to swindle the Government may he elected to the highest office in the Nation, what encouragement do public honors offer for truthfulness, integrity and fair-dealing ? What a contemptuous comment it would be upon the popular form of government if the majority of the citizens of this country should deliberately, and with a full knowledge of the facts before them, elect to the highest honors a man guilty of a crime which, had it been discovered apd verified in time, would have consigned him to the Penitentiaiy! Before such an accusation, it would no longer be possible to defend the honesty of the American people nor justify the principle of popular government. 2. It is a lamentable fact that this charge of perjury, sustained by Mr. Tilden’s own statements, not denied but tacitly admitted by him, has alienated but two or three of the public organs which had undertaken his support, and has not called from a single Democratic politician of consequence a demand that Mr. Tilden must deny having made one or tfie other qf these statements, and so clear himself absolutely from the charge. This state of things indicates more surely than ever that the single purpose and sole ambition outlie Democratic politicians is to possess the offices, patronage and power of the National Government, and that they will not halt at any obstacle nor hesitate at any villainy which may come in their way to this end. Partyism and spoils-hunting have never been carried to so dangerous an extremity. The election of Mr. Tilden, though a perjurer, would mark the succession of the Confederates of the South and the Democratic politicians of the North to power; and the fact that he would be degraded in the eyes of all decent men, and that he would be restrained by none of the motives of a man who has a character to maintain, would make him all the more pliable to their purposes. 3. Samuel J. Tilden tacitly admitting that he swore falsely in order to cheat the Government, and the Democratic politicians and press supporting him under this admission, the success of both would be the most serious menace thsbcould threaten this Government. There is no political villainy at which such a combination would hesitate. Tilden himself would have nothing to lose and everything to Sin bv lending himself to the raiders on e National Treasury. A man standing before his country as a perjurer, and convicted out of his own mouth of having swindled the Government, could not consistently refuse his aid to the men who elected him to enable them to thrust their arms deep in the strong box of the Nation. That he would not be disinclined to share their plunder seems to be sufficiently attested by the greed which has prompted him to accumulate his millions in questionable practices, and even to refuse to pay a tax thereon. He would lend himself to the Confederate raids on the Treasury to indemnity the South for ite war losses the more willingly because of his personal sympathy with the “Lost Cause.” But in all matters his ruling passion for money, and his accustomed indifference

as to the means used to obtain it, would make him the natural ally of the mercenary and corrupt men in politics, who> would naturally jnd their way to the front with such a man in the Executive Mansion.—Chicago Tribune.