乐

经典生活美好享受

找乐	健身	电影	听歌	聊天	讲演
泡吧	旅游	DV	电游	恋爱	台球

乐（FUN）-找乐

您的位置：首页-乐-讲演-本页

18.Richard M. Nixon: "Checkers"

My Fellow Americans,

I come before you tonight as a candidate for the Vice Presidency and as a
man whose honesty and integrity has been questioned.
Now, the usual political thing to do when charges are made against you is
to either ignore them or to deny them without giving details. I believe
we've had enough of that in the United States, particularly with the
present Administration in Washington, D.C.? To me the office of the Vice
Presidency of the United States is a great office, and I feel that the
people have got to have confidence in the integrity of the men who run for
that office and who might obtain it.
I have a theory, too, that the best and only answer to a smear or to an
honest misunderstanding of the facts is to tell the truth. And that's why
I am here tonight. I want to tell you my side of the case. I'm sure that
you have read the charge, and you've heard it, that I, Senator Nixon, took
$18,000 from a group of my supporters.
Now, was that wrong? And let me say that it was wrong. I am saying it,
incidentally, that it was wrong, just not illegal, because it isn't a
question of whether it was legal or illegal, that isn't enough. The
question is, was it morally wrong? I say that it was morally wrong -- if
any of that $18,000 went to Senator Nixon, for my personal use. I say that
it was morally wrong if it was secretly given, and secretly handled. And I
say that it was morally wrong if any of the contributors got special
favors for the contributions that they made.
And now to answer those questions let me say this: not one cent of the
$18,000 or any other money of that type ever went to me for my personal
use. Every penny of it was used to pay for political expenses that I did
not think should be charged to the taxpayers of the United States.? It was
not a secret fund. As a matter of? fact, when I was on "Meet the Press"--
some of you may have seen it last Sunday -- Peter Edson came up to me
after the program, and he said, "Dick, what about is fund we hear about?"
And I said, "Well, there is no secret about it. Go out and see Dana Smith
who was the administrator of the fund." And I gave him [Edson] his
[Smith's] address. And I said you will find that the purpose of the fund
simply was to defray political expenses that I did not feel should be
charged to the Government. And third, let me point out -- and I want to
make this particularly clear -- that no contributor to this fund, no
contributor to any of my campaigns, has ever received any consideration
that he would not have received as an ordinary constituent.
I just don't believe in that, and I can say that never, while I have been
in the Senate of the United States, as far as the people that contributed
to this fund are concerned, have I made a telephone call for them to an
agency, or have I gone down to an agency on their behalf. And the records
will show that, the records which are in the hands of the administration.
Well, then, some of you will say, and rightly, "Well, what did you use the
fund for, Senator? Why did you have to have it?" Let me tell you in just a
word how a Senate office operates. First of all, a Senator gets $15,000 a
year in salary. He gets enough money to pay for one trip a year, a round
trip, that is, for himself, and his family between his home and
Washington, D.C. And then he gets an allowance to handle the people that
work in his office to handle his mail. And the allowance for my State of
California, is enough to hire 13 people. And let me say, incidentally,
that that allowance is not paid to the Senator. It is paid directly to the
individuals that the Senator puts on his pay roll. But all of these people
and all of these allowances are for strictly official business; business,
for example, when a constituent writes in and wants you to go down to the
Veteran's Administration and get some information about his GI policy --
items of that type, for example. But there are other expenses that are not
covered by the Government. And I think I can best discuss those expenses
by asking you some questions.
Do you think that when I or any other senator makes a political speech,
has it printed, should charge the printing of that speech and the mailing
of that speech to the taxpayers? Do you think, for example, when I or any
other Senator makes a trip to his home State to make a purely political
speech that the cost of that trip should be charged to the taxpayers? Do
you think when a Senator makes political broadcasts or political
television broadcasts, radio or television, that the expense of those
broadcasts should be charged to the taxpayers? Well I know what your
answer is. It's the same answer that audiences give me whenever I discuss
this particular problem: The answer is no. The taxpayers shouldn't be
required to finance items which are not official business but which are
primarily political business.
Well, then the question arises, you say, "Well, how do you pay for these
and how can you do it legally?" And there are several ways that it can be
done, incidentally, and it is done legally in the United States Senate and
in the Congress. The first way is to be a rich man. I don't happen to be a
rich man, so I couldn't use that one. Another way that is used is to put
your wife on the pay roll. Let me say, incidentally, that my opponent, my
opposite number for the Vice Presidency on the Democratic ticket, does
have his wife on the pay roll and has had her on his pay roll for the past
ten years. Now let me just say this: That' his business, and I'm not
critical of him for doing that. You will have to pass judgment on that
particular point.
But I have never done that for this reason: I have found that there are so
many deserving stenographers and secretaries in Washington that needed the
work that I just didn't feel it was right to put my wife on the pay roll.
My wife's sitting over here. She is a wonderful stenographer. She used to
teach stenography and she used to teach shorthand in high school. That was
when I met her. And I can tell you folks that she's worked many hours at
night and many hours on Saturdays and Sundays in my office, and she's done
a fine job, and I am proud to say tonight that in the six years I have
been in the House and the Senate of the United States, Pat Nixon has never
been on the Government pay roll.
What are other ways that these finances can be taken care of? Some who are
lawyers, and I happen to be a lawyer, continue to practice law, but I
haven't been able to do that. I am so far away from California that I have
been so busy with my senatorial work that I have not engaged in any legal
practice, and, also, as far as law practice is concerned, it seemed to me
that the relationship between an attorney and the client was so personal
that you couldn't possibly represent a man as an attorney and then have an
unbiased view when he presented his case to you in the event that he had
one before Government.
And so I felt that the best way to handle these necessary political
expenses of getting my message to the American people and the speeches I
made -- the speeches I had printed for the most part concerned this one
message of exposing this Administration, the Communism in it, the
corruption in it -- the only way that I could do that was to accept the
aid which people in my home State of California, who contributed to my
campaign and who continued to make these contributions after I was
elected, were glad to make.
And let me say I am proud of the fact that not one of them has ever asked
me for a special favor. I am proud of the fact that not one of them has
ever asked me to vote on a bill other than my own conscience would
dictate. And I am proud of the fact that the taxpayers by subterfuge or
otherwise have never paid one dime for expenses which I thought were
political and shouldn't be charged to the taxpayers.
Let me say, incidentally, that some of you may say, "Well, that is all
right, Senator, that's your explanation, but have you got any proof?" And
I'd like to tell you this evening that just an hour ago we received an
independent audit of this entire fund. I suggested to Governor Sherman
Adams, who is the chief of staff of the Dwight Eisenhower campaign, that
an independent audit and legal report be obtained, and I have that audit
in my hands. It's an audit made by the Price Waterhouse & Co. firm, and
the legal opinion by Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher, lawyers in Los Angeles, the
biggest law firm, and incidentally, one of the best ones in Los Angeles.
I am proud to be able to report to you tonight that this audit and this
legal opinion is being forwarded to General Eisenhower. And I'd like to
read to you the opinion that was prepared by Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher, and
based on all the pertinent laws and statutes, together with the audit
report prepared by the certified public accountants:
"It is our conclusion that Senator Nixon did not obtain any financial gain
from the collection and disbursement of the fund by Dana Smith; that
Senator Nixon did not violate any federal or state law by reason of the
operation of the fund; and that neither the portion of the fund paid by
Dana Smith directly to third persons, nor the portion paid to Senator
Nixon, to reimburse him for designated office expenses, constituted income
to the Senator which was either reportable or taxable as income under
applicable tax laws."

????????? (signed)
????????? Gibson, Dunn, & Crutcher,
????????? by Elmo H. Conley

Now that, my friends, is not Nixon speaking, but that's an independent
audit which was requested, because I want the American people to know all
the facts, and I am not afraid of having independent people go in and
check the facts, and that is exactly what they did. But then I realized
that there are still some who may say, and rightly so -- and let me say
that I recognize that some will continue to smear regardless of what the
truth may be -- but that there has been understandably, some honest
misunderstanding on this matter, and there are some that will say, "Well,
maybe you were able, Senator, to fake the thing. How can we believe what
you say? After all, is there a possibility that maybe you got some sums in
cash? Is there a possibility that you might have feathered your own nest?"
And so now, that I am going to do -- and incidentally this is
unprecedented in the history of American politics -- I am going at this
time to give to this television and radio audience, a complete financial
history, everything I've earned, everything I've spent, everything I own.
And I want you to know the facts.
I'll have to start early. I was born in 1913. Our family was one of modest
circumstances, and most of my early life was spent in a store out in East
Whittier. It was a grocery store, one of those family enterprises. The
only reason we were able to make it go was because my mother and dad had
five boys, and we all worked in the store. I worked my way through
college, and, to a great extent, through law school. And then in 1940,
probably the best thing that ever happened to me happened. I married Pat
who is sitting over here. We had a rather difficult time after we were
married, like so many of the young couples who may be listening to us. I
practiced law. She continued to teach school.
Then, in 1942, I went into the service. Let me say that my service record
was not a particularly unusual one. I went to the South Pacific. I guess
I'm entitled to a couple of battle stars. I got a couple of letters of
commendation. But I was just there when the bombs were falling. And then I
returned -- returned to the United States, and in 1946, I ran for the
Congress. When we came out of the war -- Pat and I -- Pat during the war
had worked as a stenographer, and in a bank, and as an economist for a
Government agency -- and when we came out, the total of our savings, from
both my law practice, her teaching and all the time I was in the war, the
total for that entire period was just a little less than $10,000 -- every
cent of that, incidentally, was in Government bonds. Well that's where we
start, when I go into politics.
Now, what have I earned since I went into politics? Well, here it is. I've
jotted it down. Let me read the notes. First of all, I have had my salary
as a Congressman and as a Senator. Second, I have received a total in this
past six years of $1,600 from estates which were in my law firm at the
time that I severed my connection with it. And, incidentally, as I said
before, I have not engaged in any legal practice and have not accepted any
fees from business that came into the firm after I went into politics. I
have made an average of approximately $1,500 a year from nonpolitical
speaking engagements and lectures.
And then, fortunately, we have inherited little money. Pat sold her
interest in her father's estate for $3,000, and I inherited $1,500 from my
grandfather. We lived rather modestly. For four years we lived in an
apartment in Parkfairfax, in Alexandria Virginia. The rent was $80.00 a
month. And we saved for the time that we could buy a house. Now, that was
what we took in. What did we do with this money? What do we have today to
show for it? This will surprise you because it is so little, I suppose, as
standards generally go of people in public life.
First of all, we've got a house in Washington, which cost $41,000 and on
which we owe $20,000. We have a house in Whittier, California which cost
$13,000 and on which we owe $3,000. My folks are living there at the
present time. I have just $4,000 in life insurance, plus my GI policy
which I've never been able to convert, and which will run out in two
years. I have no life insurance whatever on Pat. I have no life insurance
on our two youngsters Tricia and Julie. I own a 1950 Oldsmobile car. We
have our furniture. We have no stocks and bonds of any type. We have no
interest of any kind, direct or indirect, in any business. Now, that's
what we have. What do we owe?
Well in addition to the mortgage, the $20,000 mortgage on the house in
Washington, the $10,000 one on the house in Whittier, I owe $4500 to the
Riggs Bank in Washington, D.C., with interest 4 and 1/2 percent. I owe
$3,500 to my parents, and the interest on that loan, which I pay
regularly, because it's a part of the savings they made through the years
they were working so hard -- I pay regularly 4 percent interest. And then
I have a $500 loan, which I have on my life insurance.
Well, that's about it. That's what we have. And that's what we owe. It
isn't very much. But Pat and I have the satisfaction that every dime that
we've got is honestly ours. I should say this, that Pat doesn't have a
mink coat. But she does have a respectable Republican cloth coat, and I
always tell her she'd look good in anything.

One other thing I probably should tell you, because if I don't they'll
probably be saying this about me, too. We did get something, a gift, after
the election. A man down in Texas heard Pat on the radio mention the fact
that our two youngsters would like to have a dog. And believe it or not,
the day before we left on this campaign trip we got a message from Union
Station in Baltimore, saying they had a package for us. We went down to
get it. You know what it was? It was a little cocker spaniel dog, in a
crate that he had sent all the way from Texas, black and white, spotted,
and our little girl Tricia, the six year old, named it Checkers. And you
know, the kids, like all kids, love the dog, and I just want to say this,
right now, that regardless of what they say about it, we're gonna keep it.

It isn't easy to come before a nationwide audience and bare your life, as
I've done. But I want to say some things before I conclude, that I think
most of you will agree on. Mr. Mitchell, the Chairman of the Democratic
National Committee, made this statement that if a man couldn't afford to
be in the United States Senate, he shouldn't run for the Senate. And I
just want to make my position clear. I don't agree with Mr. Mitchell when
he says that only a rich man should serve his Government in the United
States Senate or in the Congress. I don't believe that represents the
thinking of the Democratic Party, and I know that it doesn't represent the
thinking of the Republican Party.
I believe that it's fine that a man like Governor Stevenson, who inherited
a fortune from his father, can run for President. But I also feel that
it's essential in this country of ours that a man of modest means can also
run for President, because, you know, remember Abraham Lincoln, you
remember what he said: "God must have loved the common people -- he made
so many of them."
And now I'm going to suggest some courses of conduct. First of all, you
have read in the papers about other funds, now, Mr. Stevenson apparently
had a couple. One of them in which a group of business people paid and
helped to supplement the salaries of State employees. Here is where the
money went directly into their pockets, and I think that what Mr.
Stevenson should do should be to come before the American people, as I
have, give the names of the people that contributed to that fund, give the
names of the people who put this money into their pockets at the same time
that they were receiving money from their State government and see what
favors, if any, they gave out for that.
I don't condemn Mr. Stevenson for what he did, but until the facts are in
there is a doubt that will be raised. And as far as Mr. Sparkman is
concerned, I would suggest the same thing. He's had his wife on the pay
roll. I don't condemn him for that, but I think that he should come before
the American people and indicate what outside sources of income he has
had. I would suggest that under the circumstances both Mr. Sparkman and
Mr. Stevenson should come before the American people, as I have, and make
a complete financial statement as to their financial history, and if they
don't it will be an admission that they have something to hide. And I
think you will agree with me -- because, folks, remember, a man that's to
be President of the United States, a man that's to be Vice President of
the United States, must have the confidence of all the people. And that's
why I'm doing what I'm doing. And that's why I suggest that Mr. Stevenson
and Mr. Sparkman, since they are under attack, should do what they're
doing.
Now let me say this: I know that this is not the last of the smears. In
spite of my explanation tonight, other smears will be made. Others have
been made in the past. And the purpose of the smears, I know, is this, to
silence me, to make me let up. Well, they just don't know who they're
dealing with. I'm going to tell you this: I remember in the dark days of
the Hiss case some of the same columnists, some of the same radio
commentators who are attacking me now and misrepresenting my position,
were violently opposing me at the time I was after Alger Hiss. But I
continued to fight because I knew I was right, and I can say to this great
television and radio audience that I have no apologies to the American
people for my part in putting Alger Hiss where he is today. And as far as
this is concerned, I intend to continue to fight.
Why do I feel so deeply? Why do I feel that in spite of the smears, the
misunderstanding, the necessity for a man to come up here and bare his
soul as I have? Why is it necessary for me to continue this fight? And I
want to tell you why. Because, you see, I love my country. And I think my
country is in danger. And I think the only man that can save America at
this time is the man that's running for President, on my ticket -- Dwight
Eisenhower. You say, "Why do I think it is in danger?" And I say, look at
the record. Seven years of the Truman-Acheson Administration, and what's
happened? Six hundred million people lost to Communists. And a war in
Korea in which we have lost 117,000 American casualties, and I say to all
of you that a policy that results in the loss of 600 million people to the
Communists, and a war that cost us 117,000 American casualties isn't good
enough for America. And I say that those in the State Department that made
the mistakes which caused that war and which resulted in those losses
should be kicked out of the State Department just as fast as we get them
out of there.
And let me say that I know Mr. Stevenson won't do that because he defends
the Truman policy, and I know that Dwight Eisenhower will do that, and
that he will give America the leadership that it needs. Take the problem
of corruption. You've read about the mess in Washington. Mr. Stevenson
can't clean it up because he was picked by the man, Truman, under whose
Administration the mess was made.
You wouldn't trust the man who made the mess to clean it up. That's
Truman. And by the same token you can't trust the man who was picked by
the man who made the mess to clean it up and that's Stevenson. And so I
say, Eisenhower, who owes nothing to Truman, nothing to the big city
bosses -- he is the man that can clean up the mess in Washington. Take
Communism. I say that as far as that subject is concerned the danger is
great to America. In the Hiss case they got the secrets which enabled them
to break the American secret State Department code. They got secrets in
the atomic bomb case which enabled them to get the secret of the atomic
bomb five years before they would have gotten it by their own devices. And
I say that any man who called the Alger Hiss case a red herring isn't fit
to be President of the United States.
I say that a man who, like Mr. Stevenson, has pooh-poohed and ridiculed
the Communist threat in the United States -- he said that they are
phantoms among ourselves. He has accused us that have attempted to expose
the Communists, of looking for Communists in the Bureau of Fisheries and
Wildlife. I say that a man who says that isn't qualified to be President
of the United States. And I say that the only man who can lead us in this
fight to rid the Government of both those who are Communists and those who
have corrupted this Government is Eisenhower, because Eisenhower, you can
be sure, recognizes the problem, and he knows how to deal with it.
Now let me that finally, this evening, I want to read to you just briefly
excerpts from a letter which I received, a letter which after all this is
over no one can take away from us. It reads as follows:
????????? Dear Senator Nixon,
"Since I am only 19 years of age, I can't vote in this presidential
election, but believe me if I could you and General Eisenhower would
certainly get my vote. My husband is in the Fleet Marines in Korea. He' a
corpsman on the front lines and we have a two month old son he's never
seen. And I feel confident that with great Americans like you and General
Eisenhower in the White House, lonely Americans like myself will be united
with their loved ones now in Korea. I only pray to God that you won't be
too late. Enclosed is a small check to help you in your campaign. Living
on $85 a month it is all I can afford at present, but let me know what
else I can do."
Folks, it's a check for $10, and it's one that I will never cash. And just
let me say this: We hear a lot about prosperity these days, but I say why
can't we have prosperity built on peace, rather than prosperity built on
war? Why can't we have prosperity and an honest Government in Washington,
D.C., at the same time? Believe me, we can. And Eisenhower is the man that
can lead this crusade to bring us that kind of prosperity.
And now, finally, I know that you wonder whether or not I am going to stay
on the Republican ticket or resign. Let me say this: I don't believe that
I ought to quit, because I'm not a quitter. And, incidentally, Pat's not a
quitter. After all, her name was Patricia Ryan and she was born on St.
Patrick's day, and you know the Irish never quit. But the decision, my
friends, is not mine. I would do nothing that would harm the possibilities
of Dwight Eisenhower to become President of the United States. And for
that reason I am submitting to the Republican National Committee tonight
through this television broadcast the decision which it is theirs to make.
Let them decide whether my position on the ticket will help or hurt. And I
am going to ask you to help them decide. Wire and write the Republican
National Committee whether you think I should stay on or whether I should
get off. And whatever their decision is, I will abide by it.
But just let me say this last word. Regardless of what happens, I'm going
to continue this fight. I'm going to campaign up and down in America until
we drive the crooks and the Communists and those that defend them out of
Washington. And remember folks, Eisenhower is a great man, believe me.
He's a great man. And a vote for Eisenhower is a vote for what's good for
America.

　