The High Cost of Politics

The corridor of Chicago's Federal Building might have been a political headquarters on a winning election night. Supporters cheered, klieg lights glared, and there was even a victory statement. Said Illinois' former Republican Governor (1953-61) William G. Stratton: "I never went through a tougher campaign."

Stratton had won perhaps the most important vote of his life: a federal-court jury, after a 91-week trial, acquitted him of income tax evasion charges that could have jailed him for 20 years.

In court, Stratton often acted more like a candidate than a potential convict, waving to friends, shaking hands all around, and at one point drawing a rebuke from Judge Hubert L. Will for "grimacing, smiling, gesticulating." Warned Judge Will, in a somewhat inept classical allusion: "I don't want you sitting there like a sphinx, but I don't want you playing Hamlet either." Yet for all the histrionics, the basics of the trial consisted of two questions intimately related to American politics: What constitutes a political contribution? What constitutes a political expense?

Merry Christmas. Last year Stratton was indicted on charges of failing to report $93,595 in income from 1957 through 1960. The prosecution suggested that the unreported money consisted of political contributions, mostly in cash, diverted to personal use. Under a 1954 Internal Revenue Service ruling, such money is taxable. The defense did not deny that Stratton had spent more than his reported income but argued that the extra amount came either from 1) unrestricted gifts, which are not taxable, or 2) campaign funds that were spent on valid political expenses.

Parading 27 witnesses to the stand, the defense sought to show that Stratton received repeated donations that could not be classified as political contributions, because they had no strings attached. Julius Klein, a Chicago public relations man, testified that just before Stratton lost to present Governor Otto Kerner, Klein told Stratton: "Bill, you're not going to win. You'll need this money after the election. Here's $1,000." Andrew Fasseas, a Chicago financier who was once Stratton's state-revenue director, said that every Christmas he handed Stratton's wife Shirley an envelope containing $500 or $700 in cash, while Stratton stood near by. Stratton's physician said that he twice gave Stratton $500 as a "personal gift."

Boat & Bungalow. Stratton did not testify, but in the transcript of an interview with IRS agents, read to the jury, he said that he would "probably find $1,000 or $2,000 in Christmas and birthday cards, some of it from people you never even heard of." And regarding money that he deemed political contributions, he denied converting it to his personal use. Said Stratton: "I wouldn't say it would be mine in the sense that I could use it for my personal benefit. I could use it for promotion or to enhance my political career."

The Government's view of what constituted legitimate political use differed widely from Stratton's. The prosecution recalled that Stratton built a $63,000 lodge overlooking the Sangamon River, spent $5,000 remodeling his family home. The defense countered that both lodge and family home were used for official entertainment. There was also a $4,750 houseboat that Stratton kept moored near the lodge. But Witness Fasseas testified that he and nine other Republicans bought the boat for Stratton as a birthday present and, besides, "meetings were going on constantly" aboard it--once a state Supreme Court justice fell overboard and had to be fished out of the drink.

Tuxedo & Brassieres. The bookkeeper for a Chicago tailoring firm said that Stratton once paid $1,400 in cash for four suits and a tuxedo; the defense pointed out that Stratton was preparing for his inauguration. Clerks from several women's stores testified that Mrs. Stratton and Stratton's two grown daughters made cash purchases totaling thousands of dollars, mostly for dresses, shoes and undergarments. When a defense attorney objected that "there is not a scintilla of evidence as to their use," Judge Will said gently: "Do you mean you don't know what a brassiere is for?" As for the dresses, including a $383 red satin inaugural-ball gown introduced into evidence, the defense solemnly reminded the jury: "Shirley Stratton was the First Lady of Illinois."

Other purchases included, according to the prosecution, oil portraits of Stratton and his wife (supposedly for Stratton's 1956 campaign), a spinet organ, a manure spreader for Stratton's farm, a European trip for one of his daughters, a magazine subscription (Realties) for Illinois' Republican Senator Everett Dirksen. The defense replied that such items were either gifts or related to Stratton's political career. Said Defense Counsel William Barnett: "It is hard to say that even his toothpaste was not a deductible expense."

Silver-Tongued Star. The star defense witness was none other than Ev Dirksen. In his most sonorous tones, sipping water to moisten his silver tongue, Dirksen said he had known Stratton "man and boy" since the defendant was 14, went on to relate the burdensome financial life of a politician. "I have never yet found a substitute for money," said Ev. "Carrying out the work and projecting an image obviously requires funds. I've clocked the demands made upon me over a period of six months, and it comes roughly to $100 a day in political and nonpolitical requests."

Judge Will asked Dirksen whether he had ever spent campaign contributions for clothing for himself. "I came very close to it on one occasion, your honor, and it might have been a sizable sum," replied Dirksen gravely, settling into his chair for a good anecdote. As a freshman Congressman in 1933, the witness said, he arrived in Washington for Roosevelt's inauguration without a dress suit and was described in the newspapers as "the man who attended the inauguration in a rented suit." Recalled Dirksen: "It was a frightful embarrassment, and it resulted promptly in the raising of a fund of $2,700 to buy me a white tie and a long-tailed coat." He said that he had not used the money for that purpose, finally giving it to charity, but added: "I felt I might have been justified in doing so."

With Ev's testimony, the defense rested.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.