Ask the Scholar

{
    "localId": "26126949",
    "label": "WHSF: Returned, 36-3",
    "core": "doc",
    "dtoType": "document",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26126949"
}

{
    "id": "26126949",
    "sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26126949",
    "contentType": "document",
    "title": "WHSF: Returned, 36-3",
    "description": "This file contains:\n\nPat Costello to Ron Ziegler re: Mitchell's statement about inappropriate TV spots during the campaign. 1 page. [Memo], n.d.\n\nmurray Chotiner to Haldeman re: commendations for Nixon's stand on law enforcement problems from sheriffs and chiefs of police, with attached second memo describing McCarthy's endorsement of HHH. 2 pages. [Memo], 10/29/1968\n\nstatement of Nixon on his policy regulating securities makets. 1 page. [Other Document], n.d.\n\nHarlow to Haldeman re: Nixon's request for information on campaign, in specific states. 4 pages. [Memo], 10/29/1968\n\nStatemet that George White [campaign manager for Agnew] is demanding retraction for editorial attacks by the New York Times. 1 page. [Other Document], n.d.\n\nJ. W Weitzel to Nixon Staff re: contacting former staffers of Rockefeller New Majority Team to bring them over to Nixon, attached letter from one former staffer who wrote on behalf of HHH. 2 pages. [Memo], 10/23/1968\n\nStatement of Nixon on his policy regulating securities markets. 1 page. [Other Document], n.d.\n\nBill Casey to Nixon re: his attached memo touching on the \"wind-up theme\", items of interest for Nixon's summation right before the election, with two full copies. 12 pages. [Letter], 10/20/1968\n\nNote from Nixon to Jim Keogh re: sharp, hard hitting and brief statements to end the campaign. 3 pages. [Other Document], 10/20/1968\n\ntranscription of note to Haldeman re: Earl Mazo conversation with Hobe Lewis about Billy Graham's article \"the Nixon I know\", and getting it out before the election. 1 page. [Other Document], 10/21/1968\n\nGlenn Olds to Nixon re: Policy emphasis on youth in the final stretch. 1 page. [Memo], 10/29/1968\n\nGlenn Olds to Nixon re: Policy confirmation of the role of the U.N. in multinational security in the final stretch, with attached copy of Eisenhower's article \"Of War and Peace and the United Nations\". 21 pages. [Memo], 10/29/1968\n\nMurray Chotiner to Haldeman re: Arthur Fleming's endorsement of Nixon and investigation of HHH's stock increasing. 3 pages. [Memo], 11/01/0968",
    "citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26126949",
    "collections": [
        "Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection",
        "Returned White House Special Files"
    ],
    "iiifBase": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/49/1269/26126949/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/3599958/WHSF_Box_36/WHSF36-03.pdf",
    "thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/49/1269/26126949/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/3599958/WHSF_Box_36/WHSF36-03.pdf",
    "largeImageUrl": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/49/1269/26126949/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/3599958/WHSF_Box_36/WHSF36-03.pdf",
    "imageCount": 1,
    "hasImages": true,
    "source": "import",
    "hasTranscription": false
}

{
    "url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/26126949",
    "naId": 26126949,
    "levelOfDescription": "fileUnit",
    "recordType": "description",
    "ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}

{
    "seq": 1,
    "pageIndex": 0,
    "type": "document",
    "url": "https://s3.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/opastorage/live/49/1269/26126949/content/presidential-libraries/nixon/RN-RET/3599958/WHSF_Box_36/WHSF36-03.pdf",
    "mediaId": "44a7aa9c24a1c234",
    "ocrText": "Richard Nixon Presidential Library\nWhite House Special Files Collection\nFolder List\nBox Number\nFolder Number\nDocument Date\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n36\n3\nn.d.\nMemo\nPat Costello to Ron Ziegler re: Mitchell's\nstatement about inappropriate TV spots\nduring the campaign. 1 page.\n36\n3\n10/29/1968\nMemo\nmurray Chotiner to Haldeman re:\ncommendations for Nixon's stand on law\nenforcement problems from sheriffs and\nchiefs of police, with attached second memo\ndescribing McCarthy's endorsement of HHH.\n2 pages.\n36\n3\nn.d.\nOther Document\nstatement of Nixon on his policy regulating\nsecurities makets. 1 page.\n36\n3\n10/29/1968\nMemo\nHarlow to Haldeman re: Nixon's request for\ninformation on campaign, in specific states. 4\npages.\n36\n3\nn.d.\nOther Document\nStatemet that George White [campaign\nmanager for Agnew] is demanding retraction\nfor editorial attacks by the New York Times.\n1 page.\n36\n3\n10/23/1968\nMemo\nJ. W Weitzel to Nixon Staff re: contacting\nformer staffers of Rockefeller New Majority\nTeam to bring them over to Nixon, attached\nletter from one former staffer who wrote on\nbehalf of HHH. 2 pages.\nWednesday, June 17, 2009\nPage 1 of 2\nBox Number Folder Number Document Date\nDocument Type\nDocument Description\n36\n3\nn.d.\nOther Document\nStatement of Nixon on his policy regulating\nsecurities markets. 1 page.\n36\n3\n10/20/1968\nLetter\nBill Casey to Nixon re: his attached memo\ntouching on the \"wind-up theme\", items of\ninterest for Nixon's summation right before\nthe election, with two full copies. 12 pages.\n36\n3\n10/20/1968\nOther Document\nNote from Nixon to Jim Keogh re: sharp,\nhard hitting and brief statements to end the\ncampaign. 3 pages.\n36\n3\n10/21/1968\nOther Document\ntranscription of note to Haldeman re: Earl\nMazo conversation with Hobe Lewis about\nBilly Graham's article \"the Nixon I know\",\nand getting it out before the election. 1 page.\n36\n3\n10/29/1968\nMemo\nGlenn Olds to Nixon re: Policy emphasis on\nyouth in the final stretch. 1 page.\n36\n3\n10/29/1968\nMemo\nGlenn Olds to Nixon re: Policy confirmation\nof the role of the U.N. in multinational\nsecurity in the final stretch, with attached\ncopy of Eisenhower's article \"Of War and\nPeace and the United Nations\". 21 pages.\n36\n3\n11/01/0968\nMemo\nMurray Chotiner to Haldeman re: Arthur\nFleming's endorsement of Nixon and\ninvestigation of HHH's stock increasing. 3\npages.\nWednesday, June 17, 2009\nPage 2 of 2\nATTENTION RON ZEIGLER\nFROM PAT COSTELLO\nNEWS BUREAU FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nNEW YORK OCTOBER 29--THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT WAS RELEASED TUESDAY\nBY JOHN N. MITCHELL, NIXON-AGNEW NATIONAL CAMPAIGN MANAGER, ON TV\nPOLITICAL ADVERTISING:\n\"THE CAMPAIGN SPOT APPEARING ON NBC TELEVISION LAST NIGHT DEPICTING\nSCENES FROM THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION OF AUGUST PAST, PORTRAYED\nHUBERT HUMPHREY'S 'POLITICS OF JOY IN CONTRAST TO THE SERIOUS\nPROBLEMS OF OUR TIMES.\n\"IT ILL BEHOOVES THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO COMPLAIN ABOUT\nTHIS SPOT WHEN COMPARED WITH ITS MEDIA ATTEMPTS TO RELATE RICHARD NIXON\nTO THE ATOMIC BOMB AND THE VILIFICATION THE HUMPHREY CAMPAIGN HAS\nHEAPED UPON GOVERNOR AGNEW.\n\"THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE HAS SUGGESTED A NETWORK REVIEW OF\nTV COMMERCIALS. WE WOULD WELCOME THIS. THERE HAS BEEN A GROWING\nNUMBER OF DISTASTEFUL, DISTORTED, SPOTS PRODUCED BY THE HUMPHREY CAMPAIG\n\"THE HUMPHREY SPOT WHICH LAUGHS AT THE CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENT IS IN\nTHE POOREST OF TASTE AS IS THE SO-CALLED HUMPHREY'S HEARTBEAT COMMERCIAL\n\"THE HUMPHREY SPOT SHOWN RECENTLY AFTER THE MOVIE \"DOCTOR STRANGELOVE\"\nCOMPLETELY DISTORTS THE NIXON POSITION ON NUCLEAR WEAPONS. IT IS STILL\nRUNNING. IT IS REMINISCENT OF THE DISTORTED 1964 NUCLEAR SPOTS WHICH\nTHE DEMOCRATS FINALLY HAD TO WITHDRAW.\n\"THE HUMPHREY COMMERCIALS ON THE NIXON POSITION ON SOCIAL SECURITY AND\nMEDICARE ARE COMPLETELY FALSO.\nWE ALSO ARE TOLD THAT THE DEMOCRATS HAVE A NEW SERIES OF BELOW-THE-BELT\nSPOTS ABOUT TO BE RELEASED.\n\"WE WOULD AGREE THAT TELEVISION SPOTS SHOULD BE REVIEWED AND CALL UPON\nTHE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL COMMITTEE TO JOIN US IN THIS.\"\nEND\nRMN\nRMN-DET\nRMN NY\nTO:\nBOB HALDEMAN\nFROM:\nMURRAY CHOTINER\nTHE FOLLOWING IS FOR YOU INFORMATION. IT WAS RELEASED TODAY.\nNEW YORK, OCTOBER 29, 1968\nCOMMENDATIONS FOR RICHARD NIXON'S STAND ON LAW ENFORCEMENT PROBLEMS HAVE\nBEEN RECEIVED FROM SHERIFFS AND CHIEFS OF POLICE THROUGHOUT THE UNITED\nSTATES, IT WAS ANNOUNCED BY JOHN MITCHELL, NATIONAL CAMPAIGN MANAGER\nFOR NIXON-AGNEW, AT THE NEW YORK HEADQUARTERS TODAY.\nMITCHELL COMMENTED THAT SHERIFFS AND CHIEFS OF POLICE IN THE UNITED\nSTATES RECEIVED LETTERS FROM MR. NIXON EXPRESSING HIS CONCERN FOR\nTHEIR PROBLEMS AND POINTING OUT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE FEDERAL\nGOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE TOOLS BY WHICH NECESSARY ACTION TOCOMBAT CRIME\nCAN BE CARRIED OUT. IN PART, THE LETTER STATED:\n\"...WE NEED A NEW AWARENESS OF THE SEVERITY OF THE CRIME CRISIS AND\nA NEW DETERMINATION TO INITIATE AND IMPLEMENT PROGRAMS TO ELIMINATE\nTHIS CRIME WAVE. WE MUST REESTABLISH RESPECT FOR OUR LAWS AND THE\nMEN WHO ENFORCE THEM.\n\"...TO ACHIEVE THIS GOAL WILL TAKE COOPERATION AND COORDINATED EFFORT.\nTHE PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY FOR MEETING THIS\nCHALLENGE RESTS WITH LOCAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS. BUT IT IS THE\nRESPONSIBILITY OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE TOOLS BY WHICH THE\nNECESSARY ACTION CAN BE CARRIED OUT.\n\"WORKING TOGETHER, WE CAN STOP THE RISING CRIME RATE AND REDUCE THE\nINCIDENCE OF CRIME IN AMERICA. I PLEDGE TO YOU MY CONSTANT EFFORTS\nAND CONTINUED SUPPORT.\"\nTYPICAL OF THE REPLIES FROM SHERIFFS AND CHIEFS OF POLICE ARE:\nA NEW JERSEY CHIEF OF POLICE, SPEAKING ABOUT THE PROBLEMS CONFRONTING\nLAW ENFORCEMENT WROTE, \"WITH THE SUPPORT OF MEN OF YOUR CALIBER AND\nYOUR SUCCESSFUL ASCENDENCY TO THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED\nSTATES OF AMERICA WILL, I AM SURE, PROVIDE LAW ENFORCEMENT WITH THE\nTOOLS TO STEM THE RISING TIDE OF CRIME.\"\nAN INDIANA POLICE CHIEF, CITING THE DILEMNA THAT LAW ENFORCEMENT\nOFFICIALS FACE TODAY WROTE, \"IT IS GRATIFYING TO KNOW, SOMEONE AT LAST\nIS GOING TO REEVALUATE THE ENTIRE PICTURE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT IN\nAMERICA.\"\nA SOUTH DAKOTA CHIEF OF POLICE WROTE, \"WE NEED A MAN LIKE MR. NIXON TO\nBRING THIS NATION OF OURS BACK TO LAW AND ORDER. WE IN THE LAW\nENFORCEMENT AREA ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO HAVING JUSTICE DONE.\"\nA DEMOCRAT, AND CHIEF OF POLICE OF A CALIFORNIA CITY COMMENTED, \"I AM\nIN COMPLETE ACCORD WITH YOUR VIEWS ON LAW ENFORCEMENT.\"\nTHE CHIEF OF POLICE OF A TEXAS CITY REMARKS, \"I APPRECIATE VERY MUCH\nYOUR PLEDGE TO RESTORE THE BALANCE OF PEACE FORCES AS AGAINST THE\nCRIMINAL FORCES TIN THIS COUNTRY. I PLEDGE TO YOU MY SUPPORT IN\nYOUR CANDIDACY FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.\"\nEND\n@\nRMN-DET\nRN NY\nMEMORANDUM\nTO:\nBOB HALDEMAN CC: BOB ELLSWORTH\nTRUTH SQUAD (C/O HARRY FLEMMING, RNC)\nFROM:\nMURRAY CHOTINER\nDATE:\nOCTOBER 29, 1968-10:30 A.M.\nCHAPMAN'S FRIEND REPORTS:\nHHH IS NOW APPEARING ON A TV SHOW IN PETTSBURGH.\nONE OF THE FIRST QUESTIONS ASKED HIM WAS ABOUT MC CARTHY ENDORSEMENT,\nIN WHICH MC CARTHY SAID HE WOULD VOTE FOR HUMPHREY AND WOULD RECOMMEND\nTHAT ALL OF HIS SUPPORTERS DO SO.\nMC CARTHY ALSO SAID HE WOULD NOT SEEK RE-ELECTION TO THE SENATE, NOR\nWOULD HE RUN FOR PRESIDENT IN 1972.\nHHH SAID HE WAS GRATIFIED THAT AN OLD FRIEND SEES FIT TO SUPPORT ME.\nI REGRET THAT HE (MC CARTHY ) WILL NOT SEEK RE-ELECTION TO THE SENATE,\nBUT I BELIEVE HE WILL SEEK THINGS THAT WOULD ENRICH HIM INTELLECTUALLY.\nWHEN ASKED WHY MC CARTHY TOOK SO LONG TO ENDORSE HIM, HHH REPLIED THAT\nMC CARTHY THINKS FOR HIMSELF, AND IT TAKES TIME FOR WOUNDS TO HEAL.\nI HAVE SAID FOR SOME TIME THAT HE WOULD SUPPORT ME. IF OFFER A BETTER\nALTERNATIBVE. THANK YOU GENE.\nHHH SAID A MAN LIKE WALLACE IS A PHENOMENON THAT PASSES IN THE NIGHT.\nOUR FRIEND SAID THAT WALLACE'S PEOPLE HAVE SCHEDULED A RALLY FOR HIM\nIN CHICAGO, ABOUT THE SAME TIME HHH IS THERE ON SATURDAY--OUR FRIEND\nSAID THIS SHOULD BE INTERESTING.\nHHH PUT OUT A STATEMENT EARLY TODAY DEALING WITH JOBS AND UNEMPLOYMENT.\nIN HIS ATTACKS ON THE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION HHH NEVER MENTIONS IKE,\nJUST RN. HHH SAYS THAT UNDER A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION WE HAD\nRECESSIONS, AND UNDER THE DEMOCRATS THE ECONOMY HAS BOOMED.\nHHH ATTACKED NIXON'S STATEMENT SAYING HE (RN) HAD DISTORTED THE FACTS\nOF THE ECONOMIC STRUCTURE--REFERRING TO RN'S APPEARANCE ON FACE THE\nNATION. HHH SAYS THAT FOR 92 MONTHS UNDER THE DEMOCRATS THIS COUNTRY\nHAS ENJOYED SUSTAINED PROSPERITY.\nHHH IS STILL USING HIS THEME, \"YOU CAN TRUST ME, BUT NOT THE OTHERS.\"\nTHE ENTOURAGE WILL BE IN PENNSYLVANIA ALL DAY.\nEND\n@\nSTATEMENT OF RICHARD M. NIXON ON HIS POLICY REGULATING SECURITIES MARKETS\nNIXON: Our securities laws were designed to protect the investor by\ninsisting upon full and complete disclosure. This has been the order\nof the day since the securities laws of the 30's were written. I be-\nlieve in full enforcement of the law to assure absolute protection\nfor the investor; abuses should be vigorously prosecuted. I believe\nthat the federal government should be continually sensitive to the\nneeds for improvement in these laws to assure investor protection.\nThe philosophy of this Administration, however, has been that\ndisclosure alone is not enough and that somehow the government can\nmake decisions for the investor better than he can make them for him-\nself. This philosophy I reject.\nOctober 29, 1968\nMEMORANDUM\nTO:\nHaldeman\nFROM:\nHarlow\nRN requested these checks. They were made yesterday\nafternoon.\nVIRGINIA (Lin Holton)\n(1) Wallace has dropped over 5%.\n(2) Wallace is returning to Virginia a couple of times,\nso he might slow the decline.\n(3) RN is about 45%; rest split HH-GW.\n(4) Wallace vote going 2-1 for RN.\n(5) Danville Register has just endorsed RN -- deep\nin Wallace country and first time it has ever\nendorsed a Republican.\nFLORIDA (Murphin)\n(1) Poll effective Oct. 16 shows 6% Wallace decline.\n(2) RN 34; GW 27; HH 20; Undecided 19.\n(3) Wallace will decline more; will go almost\ntotally RN.\n(4) HH picking up some undecided.\n(5) RN will win Florida by 100,000\n-2-\nKENTUCKY (State Chairman Kern)\n(1) Oct. 15 poll: RN 44; GW 33; HH 32.\n(2) Later spot checks show GW down 2-4% and going down.\n(3) GW defectors splitting evenly RN-HH.\n(4) Democrats sharply intensifying effort.\nNORTH CAROLINA (State Chairman Ishouser)\n(1) No poll, but checked county chairmen very recently.\n(2) GW firm in East but ebbing slightly elsewhere;\npeaked but only small decline.\n(3) Now a 3-way even race.\nTENNESSEE (Howard Baker)\n(1) GW slipping fast in East; defectors going almost\nall to RN\n(2) RN-HH splitting GW defectors evenly in middle and\nWest.\n(3) Last Wednesday poll: RN 42; GW 32; HH 30 (shows\n6% GW drop.\n(4) Estimate for next Tuesday: RN 46; rest split GW-HH.\nSOUTH CAROLINA (Harry Dent)\n(1) Mid-October poll shows GW down 6%.\n(2) Poll: RN 32; GW 29; HH 20.\n(3) GW still declining.\n(4) RN has won all college polls (6 colleges) by\n60% or better.\n-3-\nCALIFORNIA (Bob Nathan)\n(1) Oct. 21 Field Poll: RN 50; HH 34; GW 9; Undec. 6.\n(2) No GW change.\n(3) Pleads for more TV and radio by 'RN.\nNEW JERSEY (Chairman Skidmore)\n(1) GW peaked but no decline - which helps RN.\n(2) Have 4-way race (Gregory) ; also helps RN.\nNEW YORK (Aurelio/Javits)\n(1) GW peaked at 12%; dropped now to 9%.\n(2) RN 2% ahead.\n(3) HH has momentum.\nOHIO (Chairman Dale)\n(1) Wallace slipping - but not much.\n(2) GW about 20%; should be 17% election day.\n(3) Defectors will go 2-1 HH.\nTEXAS (RN campaign pollers)\n(1) New projection for election: RN 42; HH 33; GW 24.\n(2) Resurvery of undecideds after HH 8-day blitz:\nRN 28; HH 34; GW 13.\n(3) GW vote slowly declining.\n(4) HH gaining slightly from traditional Democrats.\n(5) Thurmond very effective this week in Texas.\n- -4-\nILLINOIS (John Gomien/Dirksen)\n(1) GW off 4%.\n(2) GW defectors going HH.\n(3) Rn holding steady at 52% (new poll October 28)\n.\nDirge\nJust completed telephone poll, 9 battleground states:\nRN 43; HH 36; GW 7; Undecided 14.\nAlso found bombing halt - even end to war - would not\nchange results.\nFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE\nGEORGE W WHITE JR CAMPAIGN MANAGER FOR GOV A SPRRO T AGNES\nTODAY MET WITH HARDING F BANCROFT EXECUTIVE VICE PRES OF THE\nNEW YORK TIMES AND THE NEWSPAPSE'S ATTORNEY TO AGAIN DEMAND\n\"A FULL RETRACTION OF THE LIBEL IN ITS RECENT EDTORIALS ATTACKING\nTHE GOVERNOR\" FOLLOWING THE MEETING MR WHITE SAID:\n\"THE FALSTY OF THE TIMES' CHARGES ARE A MATTER OF COUUMENTARY\nEVIDENCE AND HAVE BEEN so CHARACTERIZED BY JOHN LEUTKEMEYER, THE\nSTATE TREASURER OF MARYLAND, A DEMOCRAT, WHO CRITICIZED THE\nEDITORIAL AS BEING 'INACCURATE AND MISLEADING' AND 'WRONG ON ITS\nFACTS>' ANDERSON, THE FORMER PRES OF THE BALTIMORE COUNTY\nCOUNCIL A DEMOCRAT ALSO ECRITCIZED THE EDTORIAL AND STATE D\nTHAT MR AGNEW'S CONDUCT WAS NOT IMPROPER.\n\"THE TIMES IS IN A DIFFICULT POSITION. AT THE MEETING TODAY,\nI DEMANDED THAT, IN THE INTEREST OF HONESTY, THE TIMES RETRACT ITS\nALLEGATIONS COMPLETELY AND WITHOUT FURTHER HEDGING. THE TIMES DID\nINDIRECTLY ADMIT IN TODAY'S EDITORIAL THAT GOVERNOR AGNEW HAS NOT\nBEEN GUILTY OF ANY WRONG DOING. I HAD HOPED THAT THE TIMES WOULD HAVE\nTHE HONESTY AND CORAGE TO ADMIT ITS ERROR. HWXXXHOWEVER MR BANCROFT\nSTATED THAT THE TIMES WAS NOT WILLING TO RETRACT ITS ORIGINAL EDITORIAL\nTO ANY GREATER DEGREE THAN IT HAS ALREADY.\n\"IN 1966, THE TIMES HAD A COMPLETE FILE ON THE GOVERNOR, INCLUDING\nTHE FACTS ON WHICH IT BASED ITS RECETN EDITORIALS. AT THAT TIME, IT\nLAUDED HIM AS A MAN OF EXPERIENCE, AND ENDORSED HIM FOR F GOVERNOR\nWITH TEXXX THE STATEMENT, \"BOTH THE STATE OF MARYLAND AND THE CAUSE\nOF MODERN MINDED REPBULICAN ISM WILL BENEFIT IF THE VOTERS ELECT\nHIM'.\n\"I HAVE BEEN ASKED WHETHER GOVERNOR AGNEW WILL FILE SUIT. IT\nWILL BE MY RECOMMENDATION IN VIEW OF THE ARBITRARY ACTION OF THE\nTIMES- THAT SUIT BE INSTITUTED\" -30-\nTHATS IT\n0\nDO 72 11-60 SPW\nHANDWRITTEN\nTO: mijon Staff\nTO:\nFROM: FROM: J.W. MEMORANDUM Writzl DATE: DATE: 10/23/68 L\nSUBJECT: attached\nMESSAGE:\nThe combat effect of attached I puggest\nyou contact H.box Milliken and see if\nfor Rockipeller chairmen I for one\nyou Can Fait a list of former mw Magority\nand give you permission to ase mg name\nstrongly support nixon over Humphrey\nif it would help\nMailing went to att farmy chairman,\nJames W. Weitzel\nCharit 4,000 mailed\nmidland Country\nnew Majority for Rockefeller\n(USE REVERSE SIDE IF NEEDED)\n6,080 maily\nfollow up wd William\nfee\nfile\nYoung Citizens for Humphrey-Muskie\nHH\n1025 CONNECTICUT AVE. N. W., WASHINGTON, D.C. 20036, TELEPHONE: 202/659-4770\nOctober 12, 1968\nDear Rockefeller Supporter:\nLast May, you and I, and thousands of young people like us,\njoined the campaign of Nelson A. Rockefeller. We were fighting for\nmore than a man; we fought together for equality and justice for all\nmen; for an end to the war in Vietnam; for a rebirth of faith by the\nAmerican people in their government. These causes have not yet died;\nthey will die only if we let them.\nI am a lifelong Republican, and I suspect many of you are\nalso. Yet my conscience will not allow me to support a man merely\nbecause of a party affiliation. The crises we face demand more of us\nthan partisanship. At the same time, we cannot remain neutral.\nDemocracy was founded upon, and its survival is dependent upon,\nparticipation by its people.\nThe stakes are too great. If we look carefully at the\nrecords of the candidates, we can find that they have made our decision\nfor us. One -- George Wallace thrives upon hate. Another, Richard\nNixon, depends upon apathy and misinformation. Only in Hubert Humphrey\ncan we find a man ready and willing to meet the challenges of our time.\nAnd it is OUR time. We cannot let this crucial moment in\nhistory slip by us, for it may well be our last chance. If America is\never to fulfill her destiny, we must join together now, to elect the\nman who will lead us forward, out of the clutches of hate and despair,\nto a new day of hope.\nVery truly yours,\nBob\nBob Harris\nPast National Director\nRockefeller \"New Majority\"\nBH:aeh\n37/23/21\n301 'Idv 1864 WICH\nNon\nJANES 1161\nmm\nSTATEMENT OF RICHARD M. NIXON ON HIS POLICY REGULATING SECURITIES MARKETS\nNIXON: Our securities laws were designed to protect the investor by\ninsisting upon full and complete disclosure. This has been the order\nof the day since the securities laws of the 30's were written. I be-\nlieve in full enforcement of the law to assure absolute protection\nfor the investor; abuses should be vigorously prosecuted. I believe\nthat the federal government should be continually sensitive to the\nneeds for improvement in these laws to assure investor protection.\nThe philosophy of this Administration, however, has been that\ndisclosure alone is not enough and that somehow the government can\nmake decisions for the investor better than he can make them for him-\nself. This philosophy I reject.\nHold.\nLAW OFFICES\nHALL, CASEY, DICKLER &\n122 EAST 42ND STREET\nNEW YORK, N.Y. 10017\nHOWLEY FRANKLIN NATIONAL\nLEONARD W. HALL\nAREA CODE 212 MO 1-3100\nBANK BLDG.\nWILLIAM J. CASEY\nCABLE \"HALCASRO\"\n600 OLD COUNTRY ROAD\nGERALD DICKLER\nGARDEN CITY, N.Y. 11532\nJOHN HOWLEY\nJOHN W. BURKE\n516 PI 7-7000\nGREGORY H. DOHERTY\nMILFORD FENSTER\n1209 RING BUILDING\nSAMUEL J. FRIEDMAN\nWILLIAM L. MAHER\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20006\n202 FE 8-6510\nPAUL S. CANTOR\nPETER B. CLARK\nH.WM. HODGES III\nMORTON A. SMITH\nEDMUND S. WARTELS\nOctober 20, 1968\nDear Dick:\nThis week, in putting together NIXON\nON THE ISSUES and working on material for current\nradio speeches, I've certainly seen that you've\nput in all the evidence.\nNow the thing is to hit the jugular\nwith the summation. It should be simple and rise\nabove the detailed issues to the great questions.\nIt should also have a moving theme. I'm anxious\nto have you read the enclosed memo which suggests\na theme which seems just right to me at this time,\nin this year. I'm going to try my hand at prepar-\ning some material to implement it, which I'll TWX\nto the plane. But if you like the thrust, you\nwill want to get ideas from others, too.\nSincerely,\nBill lazy\nMEMO to RICHARD NIXON\nFrom William Casey\nOn: Wind-up Theme\nAll signs indicate that there never were so\nmany voters undecided or lightly attached to their\npresent preference. The closing drive should have a\ntheme broad enough to hit those who can't cope with the\ndetailed issues, don't care or want to rise above them.\nThis theme should be one which can be played in harmony\nwith your treatment of each of the 4 or 5 great questions,\nas Kennedy did with \"Let's get America moving again.\"\nSuch a theme, vital and valid this time, is\nat hand in (a) the broad desire of the electorate for a\nmandate for change and action, and (b) fear and concern\nthat a divided result could produce a shaky power to\ngovern and even paralysis at a critical time.\nIt's basicly \"Let's make the electoral system\nwork\" - \"Let's assure a mandate to govern and to change\".\nThe background is laid by spelling out:\na. The electoral process not only establishes\nsuccession in office.\nb. It also creates the power to govern, sets\nnational direction and generates national momentum, and\nC. The dangers of national paralysis without\na clear mandate.\nThis can generate a powerful appeal to millions\nwho think they may be wasting their vote on Humphrey as\nwell as additional millions presently undecided or leaning\nto Wallace. This appeal will also help generate bandwagon\npsychology.\nThe targets of the summation should be:\n1. the undecided\n2. the Wallace voters who may have second\nthoughts about wasting their vote\n3. the lightly attached Humphrcy voters who\nwant to minimize the following Wallace is\nattracting - who are afraid of Wallace influence\n4. the normally Democratic and independent Nixon\nsupporters who want a change but are not too\nhappy about voting Republican.\n-2-\nA driving, concentrated appeal for a\ndecisive mandate for change and action will hit all\n4 of these groups at the point most likely to move\nand hold them. It is also the most powerful appeal\nto get Republicans to the polls.\nMany people believe from the polls that\nsuccession in office is already determined and that\ntheir vote is not needed. The mandate to govern\ntheme makes their vote important again.\nThis theme can be propelled in many ways:\n-- A talk on the electoral process and\nits function in setting a direction and giving a\nmandate for action in addition to determining succes-\nsion in office. There may not be time to do this\nfull dress as you did on the Presidency, but even a\nfew paragraphs here and there can lay the background.\n-- As you hit all the great questions in\nthese final weeks, each time call for a mandate for a\nnew direction -- emphasize that America needs leader-\nship which has a decisive mandate for action and only\nthe sacred act on Election Day can provide it.\n-- America can't deal with the problems\nand perils it faces at home and abroad without strong\nleadership which has full authority to govern as well\nas a mandate for change and action.\n-- To take effective part in this year's\nelectoral process each voter should do what he thinks\nwill provide the necessary power to govern, a mandate\nfor action, and end to inaction, the avoidance of\nnational paralysis.\n-- Make your vote count not only in electing\na man but also in expressing the voice of America, in\nsetting a direction and creating a momentum which will\nmove America forward.\n-3-\n-- Express in your vote your share of the\nnational will to have America recreate a policy in\nwhich its government will provide an unchallengeable\nnational security, develop a broad sharing of the\nburden of keeping the peace, maintain the value of\nyour dollars, and get private resources and institu-\ntions working on our social problems.\nThe focus of this appeal should not be\nentirely or even primarily the Wallace leaning voter.\nIt should be on the general plane of a mandate for\nchange, power to govern, setting a new direction so\nthat it will appeal to people who think they may be\nwasting their vote on Humphrey as well as to the\nundecided and those now leaning to Wallace. By impli-\ncation, at least, and by the explicit statement of\nothers, this theme should be able to get across the\nreality that it's not only Wallace who can't be elected\nbut also Humphrey who can't be elected with any kind\nof a mandate.\nCC: John Mitchell\nJim Keogh\nLAW OFFICES\nHALL, CASEY, DICKLER & HOWLEY\n122 EAST 42ND STREET\nNEW YORK, N.Y. 10017\nLEONARD W. HALL\nAREA CODE 212 MO 1-3100\nFRANKLIN NATIONAL BANK BLDG.\nWILLIAM J. CASEY\nCABLE \"HALCASRO\"\n600 OLD COUNTRY ROAD\nGERALD DICKLER\nGARDEN CITY, N.Y. 11532\nJOHN HOWLEY\nJOHN W. BURKE\n516 PI 7-7000\nGREGORY H. DOHERTY\nMILFORD FENSTER\n1209 RING BUILDING\nSAMUEL J. FRIEDMAN\nWILLIAM L. MAHER\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20006\n202 FE 8-6510\nPAUL S. CANTOR\nPETER B. CLARK\nH.WM. HODGES III\nMORTON A. SMITH\nEDMUND S. WARTELS\nOctober 20, 1968\nDear Dick:\nThis week, in putting together NIXON\nON THE ISSUES and working on material for current\nradio speeches, I've certainly seen that you've\nput in all the evidence.\nNow the thing is to hit the jugular\nwith the summation. It should be simple and rise\nabove the detailed issues to the great questions.\nIt should also have a moving theme. I'm anxious\nto have you read the enclosed memo which suggests\na theme which seems just right to me at this time,\nin this year. I'm going to try my hand at prepar-\ning some material to implement it, which I'll TWX\nto the plane. But if you like the thrust, you\nwill want to get ideas from others, too.\nSincerely,\nBill lazy\nMEMO to RICHARD NIXON\nFrom William Casey\nOn: Wind-up Theme\nAll signs indicate that there never were SO\nmany voters undecided or lightly attached to their\npresent preference. The closing drive should have a\ntheme broad enough to hit those who can't cope with the\ndetailed issues, don't care or want to rise above them.\nThis theme should be one which can be played in harmony\nwith your treatment of each of the 4 or 5 great questions,\nas Kennedy did with \"Let's get America moving again.\"\nSuch a theme, vital and valid this time, is\nat hand in (a) the broad desire of the electorate for a\nmandate for change and action, and (b) fear and concern\nthat a divided result could produce a shaky power to\ngovern and even paralysis at a critical time.\nIt's basicly \"Let's make the electoral system\nwork\" - \"Let's assure a mandate to govern and to change\".\nThe background is laid by spelling out:\na. The electoral process not only establishes\nsuccession in office.\nb. It also creates the power to govern, sets\nnational direction and generates national momentum, and\nC. The dangers of national paralysis without\na clear mandate.\nThis can generate a powerful appeal to millions\nwho think they may be wasting their vote on Humphrey as\nwell as additional millions presently undecided or leaning\nto Wallace. This appeal will also help generate bandwagon\npsychology.\nThe targets of the summation should be:\n1. the undecided\n2. the Wallace voters who may have second\nthoughts about wasting their vote\n3. the lightly attached Humphrey voters who\nwant to minimize the following Wallace is\nattracting - who are afraid of Wallace influence\n4. the normally Democratic and independent Nixon\nsupporters who want a change but are not too\nhappy about voting Republican.\n-2-\nA driving, concentrated appeal for a\ndecisive mandate for change and action will hit all\n4 of these groups at the point most likely to move\nand hold them. It is also the most powerful appeal\nto get Republicans to the polls.\nMany people believe from the polls that\nsuccession in office is already determined and that\ntheir vote is not needed. The mandate to govern\ntheme makes their vote important again.\nThis theme can be propelled in many ways:\n-- A talk on the electoral process and\nits function in setting a direction and giving a\nmandate for action in addition to determining succes-\nsion in office. There may not be time to do this\nfull dress as you did on the Presidency, but even a\nfew paragraphs here and there can lay the background.\n-- As you hit all the great questions in\nthese final weeks, each time call for a mandate for a\nnew direction -- emphasize that America needs leader-\nship which has a decisive mandate for action and only\nthe sacred act on Election Day can provide it.\n-- America can't deal with the problems\nand perils it faces at home and abroad without strong\nleadership which has full authority to govern as well\nas a mandate for change and action.\n-- To take effective part in this year's\nelectoral process each voter should do what he thinks\nwill provide the necessary power to govern, a mandate\nfor action, and end to inaction, the avoidance of\nnational paralysis.\n-- Make your vote count not only in electing\na man but also in expressing the voice of America, in\nsetting a direction and creating a momentum which will\nmove America forward.\n-3-\n-- Express in your vote your share of the\nnational will to have America recreate a policy in\nwhich its government will provide an unchallengeable\nnational security, develop a broad sharing of the\nburden of keeping the peace, maintain the value of\nyour dollars, and get private resources and institu-\ntions working on our social problems.\nThe focus of this appeal should not be\nentirely or even primarily the Wallace leaning voter.\nIt should be on the general plane of a mandate for\nchange, power to govern, setting a new direction SO\nthat it will appeal to people who think they may be\nwasting their vote on Humphrey as well as to the\nundecided and those now leaning to Wallace. By impli-\ncation, at least, and by the explicit statement of\nothers, this theme should be able to get across the\nreality that it's not only Wallace who can't be elected\nbut also Humphrey who can't be elected with any kind\nof a mandate.\nCC: John Mitchell\nJim Keogh\nLAW OFFICES\nHALL, CASEY, DICKLER & HOWLEY\n122 EAST 42ND STREET\nNEW YORK, N.Y. 10017\nLEONARD W. HALL\nAREA CODE 212 MO 1-3100\nFRANKLIN NATIONAL BANK BLDG.\nWILLIAM J. CASEY\nCABLE \"HALCASRO\"\n600 OLD COUNTRY ROAD\nGERALD DICKLER\nGARDEN CITY, N.Y. 11532\nJOHN HOWLEY\nJOHN W. BURKE\n516 PI 7-7000\nGREGORY H. DOHERTY\nMILFORD FENSTER\n1209 RING BUILDING\nSAMUEL J. FRIEDMAN\nWILLIAM L. MAHER\nWASHINGTON, D.C. 20006\n202 FE 8-6510\nPAUL S. CANTOR\nPETER B. CLARK\nH.WM. HODGES III\nMORTON A. SMITH\nEDMUND S. WARTELS\nOctober 20, 1968\nDear Dick:\nThis week, in putting together NIXON\nON THE ISSUES and working on material for current\nradio speeches, I've certainly seen that you've\nput in all the evidence.\nNow the thing is to hit the jugular\nwith the summation. It should be simple and rise\nabove the detailed issues to the great questions.\nIt should also have a moving theme. I'm anxious\nto have you read the enclosed memo which suggests\na theme which seems just right to me at this time,\nin this year. I'm going to try my hand at prepar-\ning some material to implement it, which I'll TWX\nto the plane. But if you like the thrust, you\nwill want to get ideas from others, too.\nSincerely,\nBill lazey\nMEMO to RICHARD NIXON\nFrom William Casey\nOn: Wind-up Theme\nAll signs indicate that there never were SO\nmany voters undecided or lightly attached to their\npresent preference. The closing drive should have a\ntheme broad enough to hit those who can't cope with the\ndetailed issues, don't care or want to rise above them.\nThis theme should be one which can be played in harmony\nwith your treatment of each of the 4 or 5 great questions,\nas Kennedy did with \"Let's get America moving again.\"\nSuch a theme, vital and valid this time, is\nat hand in (a) the broad desire of the electorate for a\nmandate for change and action, and (b) fear and concern\nthat a divided result could produce a shaky power to\ngovern and even paralysis at a critical time.\nIt's basicly \"Let's make the electoral system\nwork\" - \"Let's assure a mandate to govern and to change\".\nThe background is laid by spelling out:\na. The electoral process not only establishes\nsuccession in office.\nb. It also creates the power to govern, sets\nnational direction and generates national momentum, and\nC. The dangers of national paralysis without\na clear mandate.\nThis can generate a powerful appeal to millions\nwho think they may be wasting their vote on Humphrey as\nwell as additional millions presently undecided or leaning\nto Wallace. This appeal will also help generate bandwagon\npsychology.\nThe targets of the summation should be:\n1. the undecided\n2. the Wallace voters who may have second\nthoughts about wasting their vote\n3. the lightly attached Humphrcy voters who\nwant to minimize the following Wallace is\nattracting - who are afraid of Wallace influence\n4. the normally Democratic and independent Nixon\nsupporters who want a change but are not too\nhappy about voting Republican.\n-2-\nA driving, concentrated appeal for a\ndecisive mandate for change and action will hit all\n4 of these groups at the point most likely to move\nand hold them. It is also the most powerful appeal\nto get Republicans to the polls.\nMany people believe from the polls that\nsuccession in office is already determined and that\ntheir vote is not needed. The mandate to govern\ntheme makes their vote important again.\nThis theme can be propelled in many ways:\n-- A talk on the electoral process and\nits function in setting a direction and giving a\nmandate for action in addition to determining succes-\nsion in office. There may not be time to do this\nfull dress as you did on the Presidency, but even a\nfew paragraphs here and there can lay the background.\n-- As you hit all the great questions in\nthese final weeks, each time call for a mandate for a\nnew direction -- emphasize that America needs leader-\nship which has a decisive mandate for action and only\nthe sacred act on Election Day can provide it.\n-- America can't deal with the problems\nand perils it faces at home and abroad without strong\nleadership which has full authority to govern as well\nas a mandate for change and action.\n-- To take effective part in this year's\nelectoral process each voter should do what he thinks\nwill provide the necessary power to govern, a mandate\nfor action, and end to inaction, the avoidance of\nnational paralysis.\n-- Make your vote count not only in electing\na man but also in expressing the voice of America, in\nsetting a direction and creating a momentum which will\nmove America forward.\n-3-\n-- Express in your vote your share of the\nnational will to have America recreate a policy in\nwhich its government will provide an unchallengeable\nnational security, develop a broad sharing of the\nburden of keeping the peace, maintain the value of\nyour dollars, and get private resources and institu-\ntions working on our social problems.\nThe focus of this appeal should not be\nentirely or even primarily the Wallace leaning voter.\nIt should be on the general plane of a mandate for\nchange, power to govern, setting a new direction so\nthat it will appeal to people who think they may be\nwasting their vote on Humphrey as well as to the\nundecided and those now leaning to Wallace. By impli-\ncation, at least, and by the explicit statement of\nothers, this theme should be able to get across the\nreality that it's not only Wallace who can't be elected\nbut also Humphrey who can't be elected with any kind\nof a mandate.\nCC: John Mitchell\nJim Keogh\nOctober 20, 1968\nJIM KEOGH\nthold\n(Notes from RN -- telephone Sunday Night)\n\"I was looking at the material you have planned for\npreparation for the next week. I want to double up next week\nin terms of a sharp hitting on the major issues -- basically\nexcerpt type -- very brief -- no more than a page and a fourth\nor a page and a half at the outside.\n\"Cincinnatti -- strong on law and order. May be the\nidea that law and order is not a code word for racism -- but\nmainly indicating the choice on law and order -- a vote for\nHumphrey is a vote for a policy under which crime will double\nin the next four years unless we get a change in policy. Sharp.\nhard-hitting.\n\"In the next two weeks we can directly zero in on the\ndifference between HHH and Nixon - cracking hard not only on\nhis record - his defense of Clark and it might take on his attack\nof me on (talk this over - if not used today (Monday) might be\nanother day) the Supreme Court -- that I would make appointments\nthat would be conservative and take the court back -- then they\n))\ndan pick up out of the stuff I have used in answering questions\non TV -- judges who realize it is their responsibility to\ninterpret the laws not to make the laws. Hitting again that some\nof the decisions have gone too far in weaking the peace forces\nas against the criminal forces. Might throw in a word that Potter\nStewart has been on the right side of these issues -- I agree with\nhim rather than with the majority (discuss this before using it).\n- 2 -\nColumbus -- Humphrey the most expensive Senator will be the\nmost expensive President -- increase in taxes - increase in\nprices, etc.\nOr since Rhodes' trademark is jobs -- take out the labor speech\n-- 15 million new jobs - maybe Safire could develop this one\n-- a vote for Humphrey is a vote to raise your prices and raise\nyour taxes --\nBack to the crime excerpt -- A vote for Humphrey is a\nvote for a policy that has seen crime go up three times as\nfast as it did under Eisenhower, etc.\nToledo -- I think that is where HHH made his \"You never\nhad it so good\" statement -- check that out.\nIf this is so -- work up something like this --\nWho does he tell this to -- farmers - what has happened\nto them --- the aged -- what has happened to them -- wage earners --\nless money despite his pay increases -- millions who have seen\ntheir loved ones killed in Vietnam. Those that have been the\nvictims of crime. Something like that --\nThat is some guidance for Cincinnatti and for Columbus.\nI want two a day in the next week and each is to be\nsharp and hard-hitting and come back on each one of these major\nissues.\nForeign policy could be hit Tuesday in terms of let's\nlook around the world apart from Vietnam. The danger of war is\ngreater - the prospects for peace lower - we have to have new\npolicies. American respect down -- American power down -- a\nvote for HHH is a vote to continue these policies.\n- 3 -\nThe language style is not the querulous kind but just\nhard hitting and strong.\nLaw and Order\nInflation\nForeign Policy\nPeace thing -- in the take off on it -- Humphrey the\nuncertain trumpet --- he has been on all sides of every issue.\nThat is the greatest risk of war where a man is on all sides\nfor that leads to miscalculation.\nE-call\nEARL MAZO talked with Fill Hobe Lewis today -- Hobe was having\nHole\nBOB HALDEMAN\n10/21/68\nHold.\nlunch with Billy Graham -- re the article \"The Nixon I know.\nEARL THINKS IT IS VITAL THAT WE GET THAT STORY WRITTEN AND OUT\nIN PAMPHLET FORM BEFORE THE ELECTION. Thinks it should be able\nto be done in two days.\nI AGREE -- what good will be the article do after the election?\nOf course, it will be good but of not much use if anything goes\nWEEKXX wrong on this election.\nRMW\nProblem here in to get y raham to\nfinish the article and allow it to be\nNo\npublished in pamphlet X form before the election.\nHole sayr Graham seemed a lit reluctant\nto do their but will grobe further if\nwe want him to. Maybe one afour people\nshould give G naha a Call.\nL.\nN\nNIXON FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE,\nP.O. BOX 1968, TIMES SQUARE STATION,\nNEW YORK, NEW YORK 10036\nfro\nPHONE (212) 661-6400\nMEMORANDUM\nOctober 29, 1968\nTO:\nRN\nFROM:\nGlenn Olds\nSUBJECT:\nPolicy Emphasis on Youth in the Final Stretch\nYour remarkable speech on \"Today's Youth: The Great Gener-\nation\" has a telling impact on the 'first' and 'young'\nvoter. Its precise advocacy of a new Youth Service to pro-\nvide:\n(1) An open channel section\n(2) A Sports and Fitness section\n(3) A World Youth Activity section, and\n(4) Young People's ombudsman\nhas touched the deep concern of this large new voting con-\nstituency, and secondarily, teachers, parents, and workers\nwith youth who understand their real idealism.\nUnderscoring these practical and specific proposals in these\nlast few days will do much to \"turn on\" this group not yet\ncommitted. They are law abiding, respectful, groping. What\nthey seek is an honest, authentic channel for real political\nparticipation, and you offer it!\ncc: Messrs. Haldeman\nGarment\nMitchell\nKeogh\nN\nNIXON FOR PRESIDENT COMMITTEE,\nP.O. BOX 1968, TIMES SQUARE STATION,\nNEW YORK, NEW YORK 10036\nPHONE (212) 661-6400\nMEMORANDUM\nOctober 29, 1968\nTO:\nRN\nFROM:\nGlenn Olds\nSUBJECT:\nPolicy confirmation of the role of the U.N. in\nmultinational security in the final stretch\nOne of the telling strengths of the campaign- to conservative\nand liberal alike - has been your insistence on broadening\nthe base of \"shared responsibility\" for maintaining security\nin the world. Your emphasis on realigned regional respon-\nsibility in Southeast Asia, Europe, and Latin America, with\na larger measure of local accountability has been greatly\napplauded.\nLarge numbers of voters have been waiting for the clincher to\nthis emphasis; i.e. reorganization and strengthening of the\nU.N. to reflect a more realistic and weighted responsibility\nof the world organization for peace-making, and peace-keeping.\nMr. Humphrey has disqualified himself from any serious pronoun-\ncements on such matters through the shameful way George Ball\nresigned and flouted U Thant and the U.N. to join him.\nLast week at a U. N. luncheon given by the Secretary General\nfor the Ambassadors attending the Yugoslavian conference last\nsummer (which I attended on your behalf), there was much dis-\ncussion about some hopeful word from you on the U.N. before the\nelection. In the 76 statements on Foreign Policy in Nixon on\nthe Issues, there is none explicitly on the U.N., and only one\nreference to U.N. membership for Communist China. Such a state-\nment need not awaken conservative fears that we thereby abandon\na strengthened nationalism, but rather that we seek to enlist\nmore fully, the other nations of the world in carrying a more\n-2-\nlegitimate share of responsibility, and its cost in money and\nmanpower, for maintaining peace in the world. It need be no\nmore than general mention of this hope.\nSuch an emphasis would, I believe, alienate no one, and would\nturn large numbers of the still undecided youth, independent,\nand liberal vote positively in your support.\n(Note: I append the remarkable review of President Eisenhower's\nviews on the matter appearing in the U.N. publication this\nSpring. My own memo of June 13 makes specific recommendation.\nAt this time I would make no specific recommendations beyond\nthe broad principle advocating strengthening the U.N. to perform\nits proper role.)\nCC: Messrs. Haldeman\nGarment\nMitchell\nKeogh\n-\nOF\nWAR\nWITH AN PLUS EXCLUSIVE ARTICLES BY INTERVIEW DWIGHT ANDREW D. BOYD, EISENHOWER TRISTRAM COFFIN, BERN AND KEATING, PEACE AND PAUL BY MARY DEHNITED THE KERSEY ERNEST NATIONS HARVEY A.\nGROSS,\nP.N.U.\nDAVIS\nVISTA\nTHE UNITED NATIONS ASSOCIATION\nJANUARY-FEBURARY, 1968\n14\nwent to him in Gettysburg\nAn Exclusive Interview\nwith\nGeneral Dwight D. Eisenhower\nI\n-during the midst of yet\nanother crisis which had\ncome near to reducing the\nUN to what its friends had\nby Mary Kersey Harvey\nfeared and its critics pre-\ndicted-an arena for shouting\nMary Kersey Harvey is a senior editor\nmatches between sovereign states.\nof McCall's magazine who has long\nI went to Gettysburg to seek\nbeen interested in the problems of in-\nthe President's views on what can\nteruational organization.\nand needs to be done to transform\nthe UN into the limited federated\nworld government he had said—\nin 1948-was a central require-\nment of peace with justice.\nWhat he had to say during the\ncourse of our extended talk that\nwinter morning surpassed anything\nI expected. Indeed, if Grenville\nClark was the prime theoretician\nof world order, Dwight Eisen-\nhower is its greatest strategist. For\nto back up a world organization\nwith revised and more equitably\napportioned legislative and ex-\necutive branches, President\nEisenhower would give the UN\ntactical nuclear weapons, while\ndenying them to anyone else. But\nlet's begin at the beginning.\nPrior to my arrival in Gettys-\nburg I had prepared for our\ninterview by recalling many of the\npointed- comments that had been\nmade concerning the UN and\nworld peace during the last\ntwenty years. Particularly I had\nrefreshed my memory concerning\nGeneral Eisenhower's many per-\ntinent speeches on the subject dur-\ning his long years in public life.\n\"What hope can there be for\nthe future of the world unless\nthere is some form of world\n15\ngovernment which can make its\nof the new United Nations\neffort to prevent a renewal of\nthis lesson had not yet been ac-\nthe awful struggle through which\ncepted. Its application would have\nwe have just passed?\" Churchill\nmeant some form of limited\nasked in 1950.\nfederated world government.\"\nIn 1961 John F. Kennedy told\nBecause the nations had not\nthe UN: \"The risks in disarma-\naccepted this lesson, a defective\nment pale in comparison to the\nchild was born at San Francisco\nrisks inherent in an unlimited\nin June, 1945.\narms race.\" He called for \"a\nTwenty years later in St. Louis\npeace race in which the Russians\nPresident Eisenhower joined with\nwould advance with us, step by\nPresident Truman for a celebra-\nstep, toward general and complete\ntion of the UN's twentieth birth-\ndisarmament.\"\nday. At a press conference\nIn 1961 the Soviet Union\nfollowing the ceremony, President\nproposed:\nEisenhower's praise of the work\nof the UN's special agencies was\n\"In order to make it easier to\npublished widely. But when the\nPresident stressed the imperative\nreach agreement with the W. estern\nneed for strengthening the world\npowers and to prevent the control\norganization without delay, it\nquestion from becoming an ob-\nwent unnoticed by all but a few.\nstacle\nthe Soviet Government\nhas stated that if the estern\npowers will accept the proposal\netween Dwight D.\nEisenhower's statements\non general and complete disarma-\nment, the Soviet Union will un-\nof 1948 and 1965 lay\nconditionally accept those Powers'\ntwo peaceful terms as\nPresident of the United\nproposals on control.\"\nStates. What had he\nthought, said and done, as leader\nLong before these bold words\nof the world's most powerful\nwere spoken the then General\nnation, and as the single most\nEisenhower had already grasped\nrespected and admired public\nthe nature of the requirements of\nfigure in the world, to \"wage\nworld order. In 1948 he wrote:\npeace\"?\n\"During the war it was demon-\nPlenty.\nstrated that international unity of\nFrom the very beginning of his\npurpose and execution could be\nAdministration, he unremittingly\nattained, without jeopardy to any\nsought creative proposals that\nnation's independence, if all were\nmight lead to progress toward\nwilling to pool a portion of their\ngenuine peace. He initiated the\nauthority in a new single head-\ncultural-exchange program with\nquarters with power to enforce\nthe Soviet Union. He took the\ntheir decisions. In the formation\ninitiative in calling a halt to the\n16\nAnglo-Israeli aggression against\nAt the height of the second\nSuez, but warned the Soviets\npresidential campaign, a few days\nagainst any attempt of theirs to\nafter Anglo-Israeli forces moved\nintrude by force. He vetoed mili-\non the Suez, the President, well\ntary intervention in Laos. And\naware of the possible domestic\nmade proposal after proposal\npolitical consequences, went\naimed at disarmament and a\ngrim-faced on national television\nworld security system based on law.\nand explained why compliance\nDuring the weeks of torturous\nwith the United Nations' call for\npreparation of one of his major\na cease-fire was imperative. He\npeace speeches (\"Chance for\nthen re-stated his belief in the need\nPeace,' 1953) he was determined\nfor giving the UN more muscle:\nthat what he said would be more\n-far more-than just a jumble\nof platitudes. The world was sick\n\"The United Nations represents\nof hearing its leaders' smarmy-\nthe best and soundest hope for\npeace in the world\nFor this\nmouthed rhetoric. They demanded\nvery reason I believe that the\nmore than a forced trip on the\nnuclear collision course.\nprocesses of the UN need further\nIn \"Chance for Peace\" Presi-\nto be developed and strength-\nened.\"\ndent Eisenhower declared war-\ntotal war-not upon any human\nenemy, but upon the brute forces\nDwight Eisenhower knew then,\nof poverty and need in the world.\nas he knew in 1948, and knows\ntoday, that the world could not\nand cannot afford the danger of\n\"The cost of one modern heavy\nrelying on voluntary compliance\nbomber is this: a modern brick\nwith UN resolutions and\nschool in more than thirty cities\ninjunctions.\nWe pay for a single destroyer\nA few months later, facing\nwith new homes that could house\nmasses assembled at the Capitol\nmore than eight thousand people.\nfor his second Inauguration, Pres-\n\"This\" is not a way of life\nident Eisenhower again sounded\nUnder the cloud of threatening\na grave, but hopeful note:\nwar, it is humanity hanging from\na cross of iron.\n'The building of\nthe peace is\n\"This government is ready to ask\na bold and solemn purpose. To\nits people to join with all nations\nproclaim it is easy\nTo serve\nin devoting a substantial percent-\nit will be hard\nWe must be\nage of the savings achieved by\nready to pay its full price\ndisarmament to a fund for world\nOne truth must rule all we think\naid and reconstruction.\"\nand all we do.\"\n17\nAnd at the convening of the\nt felt like snow as I walked\nfifteenth session of the UN\naffirmed with utter clarity his\nmounting concern about the need\nII\nthe path to the President's\nGeneral Assembly the President\noffices at Gettysburg College\non the morning of Novem-\nber 7th. The President-\nfor giving the world body power\nwho had been up before\nto enact and enforce law binding\ndawn-had already hiked to the\non all nations:\npolls, cast his vote and dictated\nseveral letters by the time I\n\"Thus, we see as our goal, not a\narrived for the 9 o'clock meeting.\nsuperstate above nations, but a\nThe President was somewhat\nworld community, embracing\nthinner than when we last met in\nthem all, rooted in law and\n1963 at dinner at the Eisenhower\njustice.\"\nfarm, but he was every bit as\nearnest, enthusiastic and ebullient.\nDwight Eisenhower's horror of\nIt was going to be difficult to\nwar and restless hope for peace\nkeep track of everything he said.\nover so extended a period of time\nThoughts, stories, quotations, ref-\nis unmatched by any other U.S\nerences to history, dates, crises,\nPresident of our time.\nnames, technical terms, numbers\n-all cascaded forth with a brisk-\nness, accuracy and intensity char-\nacteristic of few men of any age.\nI was clutching my worn copy\nof \"Waging Peace\" along with\nother papers and memory-refresh-\ners. That book had been a devil\nto write, the President said. The\nresearch part of it had been tre-\nmendous and tedious. He thought\nhe would never get through it.\nHis eyes twinkled a bit as he set-\ntled into his chair and talked\nabout his new book, \"At Ease\".\nNow that one had been fun to\nwrite. It was just like telling\nstories to friends.\nIt was fun to read, too, I told\nthe President. But more than that,\nit helped us understand the roots\nof his intense hatred of violence\nand war. This hatred was in-\ntrinsic. A story that had etched\n18\nWar and Peace and the UN\nbecause of the inability of its sov-\nitself deeply in my mind had to\nereign members to make objective\ndo with the six-year old Dwight's\njudgments, dispense justice, and\nreaction to the sight of his broth-\nenforce decisions on a world\ner's whipping. He had broken\nscale, thus leaving our interdepend-\ninto tears and cried out \"Stop!\nent world without the machin-\nPlease stop! Even a dog shouldn't\nery to prevent drift and anarchy.\nbe treated like that!\"\nThe President knew why I was\nhe President read the\nthere. Paul G. Hoffman, director\neditorial carefully,\nof the United Nations Develop-\ntook off his glasses, and\nment Programme, had explained\nturned to me, leaning\nto him that readers of VISTA\nforward in his chair. He\nand United Nations Associations\nspoke with great\npublications in 65 other countries\nearnestness. There were, it seemed\nwere well aware of the great\nto him, many valid reasons for\nservices performed by the UN's\nconcern, although some voices are\nancillary agencies, but were be-\npredictably gloomy. We had to\ncoming increasingly concerned by\nkeep in mind the civilizing and\nits weakness with respect to its\nhealing effect of the UN special\ncentral function: prevention of\nagencies.\nthe threat or use of force against\nthe territorial integrity of member\nnations. What the President had\nto say would be read by the many\nmembers of these United Nations\nAssociations throughout the world.\nI handed the President excerpts\nfrom a recent New York Times\neditorial which said in essence\nthat many of the more responsible\npowers were now doubting-more\nthan eyer before in its history-\nwhether continued membership in\nthe UN was in their best inter-\nests. It further said that they\nfeared that unless procedures were\nchanged to conform with the\nUN's changed character the or-\nganization would not survive.\n-I then expressed my own some-\nwhat stronger concern that the\norganization might be torn apart\n19\nBut, he added, history shows\nof resources, money and man-\ninvariably that associations of sov-\npower, and it might save suffi-\nereign nations (and he empha-\ncient resources to meet many of\nsized the word \"sovereign\")\nthe basic requirements of the\nnever achieve the results that\nworld's impoverished, and (2)\nidealists and indeed practical peo-\neliminate the chances of a world\nple expect them to. The President\ncataclysm and the extinction of\ngave NATO as a recent and stun-\ncivilization. Disarmament, to the\nning example of this. It had\nPresident, was a step-certainly a\nworked only so long as all of its\nmajor one-toward the greatest of\nmembers were willing to go\nall goals: a just peace.\nalong. But there had been no way\nto prevent its members from uni-\nhe next question had\nlateral action, from pulling out\nto do with the pro-\nwhen it appeared to be in their\ndigious efforts made by\nnational interest.\nthe Eisenhower Adminis-\nThe point the President was\ntration to come up with\nmaking was that the UN, in\ndisarmament proposals\nreality, was a world treaty group.\nwhich would be effective and\nIts members were no more bound\nacceptable, not only to our Con-\nto abide by it than members of\ngress and to our allies, but to the\nregional treaty groupings. Na-\nSoviets. These efforts had been\ntional sovereignty, one got the\ncontinuous and unremitting,\nfeeling, was to the President the\nstrenuous and consistent.\nmain villain of the piece. (Peace,\nNow, some seven years had\ntoo, for that matter.)\nelapsed since his Administration's\nThe President, in \"Waging\nfinal and comprehensive plan for\nPeace\" had said that \"of the var-\ndisarmament had been placed be-\nious Presidential tasks to which I\nfore the world in 1960. No\nearly determined to devote my\nmeaningful progress toward uni-\nenergies, none transcended in im-\nversal disarmament had been\nportance that of trying to devise\nmade during those seven years. In\npractical and acceptable measures\nfact regression had characterized\ntoward universal disarmament.\"\nthe period. The arms race had\nWhat he meant by \"universal\",\nescalated. There was one full-\nof course; was disarmament by all\nfledged war in the field, others\nnations of the world. Would this\nthreatening. How did the\nstill be his number one goal, I\nPresident account for this\nenquired? Universal disarmament,\ndeplorable record?\nthe President answered, would\nWithout hesitation he snapped\nnot fully assure peaceful settle-\nout his answer. The failure could\nment of all international issues,\nbe laid directly to the war in\nbut it would certainly (1) lessen\nVietnam.- You cannot be fighting\nthe diversion from useful purposes\na war and negotiate effectively\n20\nW ar and Peace and the UN\nWould this not represent a hor-\nabout disarmament at the same\nrendous threat to world stability?\ntime.\nAs an example, I wondered what\nNow there were those, of\nwould have happened if either or\ncourse, who might have answered\nboth the Israelis and Arabs had\nthe question in another way, he\npossessed even a few nuclear\nwent on to say. They would lay\nweapons during the June clashes.\nthe failure to the Soviet's various\nThe President pointed out that\nand varying stances on inspection.\nhe had proposed, early in his Ad-\nBack in the days of Stalin, the\nministration, that the small and\nPresident explained, the Russians'\nmiddle-sized countries be pro-\njustifiable fears of war and of\nvided with nuclear know-how.\nopening their country to foreign-\nWith this would have come a\ners were about proportionate.\nsense of maturity and responsibil-\nStalin had once told him, the\nity, he said. Too, if all nations\nPresident went on, that no major\nnow possessed nuclear capability\nprojects, i.e. massive hydro-electric\nthey might be more willing to\nplants, dams, and the likes would\ntalk seriously about universal dis-\nbe constructed until the chances\narmament.\nof their destruction in another war\next question.\nhad diminished to a reassuring\nAs a five-star\ndegree. Thus, the President told\nGeneral, and as a\nme, when the Russians-after\nPresident elected by\nStalin's death-began construc-\nRepublicans who,\ntion of many massive and costly\nto a large extent,\nprojects-he came to the conclu-\ndominate the nation's industry,\nsion that they no longer feared\nthe President had astounded the\nattack and would be amenable\ncountry with his warning against\nto a disarmament plan which con-\nwhat he bluntly termed \"the\ntained some, but not excessive\nmilitary-industrial complex.\"\ninspection. He still felt justified in\nIn his Farewell Address, the\nhaving reached that conclusion.\nPresident had sternly emphasized\nOf course, he added, the Sino-\nthat\nSoviet relationship now makes it\ndifficult for the Russians to talk\n\"The conjunction of an immense\ndisarmament with us, just as our\nmilitary establishment and a large\ninvolvement in the Vietnam war\narms industry is new in the Amer-\nmakes it difficult for us.\nican experience. Its total influence\nwondered if the President\n—economic, political, even spirit-\nwas disturbed about the very\nual-is felt in every city, every\nreal possibility that a number\nstate house, every office of the\nof smaller nations would soon\nFederal Government.\nacquire nuclear material and\n\"We must not fail to compre-\nthemeans for its delivery.\nbend its grave implications. We\n21\nmust guard against the unwar-\nWashington. Possibly $35 billion\nranted influence\nby the mili-\nfor hardware alone! he exclaimed.\ntary-industrial complex. The po-\nThese fellows couldn't get out\ntential for the disastrous rise of\nof it if they wanted to, the Pres-\nmisplaced power exists and will\nident was afraid. Would he, I\npersist.\"\nasked, go into some detail about\nthe component parts of the\nWas there, in the President's\nmilitary-industrial complex? Who\nopinion, any connection, however\nwere they? Where were they?\nminuscule, between the \"persist-\nWell, to begin with, there were\ning power\" of the military-indus-\nthe politicians. Every Congress-\ntrial complex and the failure of\nman, the President explained,\ndisarmament efforts? The Presi-\nwants air bases, aerospace con-\ndent slumped back in his chair,\nlet his arms hang limply at his\nsides. His answer came slowly.\nHe reminded me that as far\nback as 1930 he had been as-\nsigned to work on a Commission\nto take the profits out of war.\nBernard Baruch had been his\n\"mentor\". But it was vastly-dif-\nferent in those days. Whether\nwars were of long or short dura-\ntion, a long period of peace was\nconfidently anticipated. Whenthey\nwere over, industry promptly\nbegan to re-tool for civilian needs.\nThis was costly. And, moreover,\nnot all industry became involved\nin war production. Those that did\nsuffered by losing their consumer-\noriented production capability as\nwell as their customers. There\nwas, except in special cases, no\nappreciable profit in war then.\nNothing comparable at all to the\nprofits of today.\nMoreover, the President said,\nwe have a situation now where\nwhole segments of the economy\nand the society are partially or\ntotally dependent on the billions\nof dollars flowing to them from\n26\nContinued from page 21\nontrary to what most\ntracts, R & D establishments,\npeople think, the\nmilitary camps, and the like, for\nnation's largest\nhis state. And what's more, once\nindustrial employer is\nhe's got these things for his state,\nNOT the automotive\nhe'll fight to the death to see they\nindustry. It's the aero-\naren't dismantled, even when they\nspace industry. It employs\nno longer serve their original or\n1,384,000 workers. Four-fifths of\nany real purpose. You hear the\nits sales are to the Federal gov-\nrumblings on the Hill every time\nernment. Its workers and particu-\nMcNamara wants to close a ship-\nlarly its scientists are certainly an\nyard or an airbase. Another group\nimportant component in the com-\nin the complex, the defense con-\nplex. Then you've got the elec-\ntractors, not only work through\ntronics, ordnance and petroleum\ntheir Congressmen, but court the\nfellows, all with very real inter-\nPentagon directly.\nests in the continuance of the\nIt has even gotten into the uni-\nwar machine.\nversities, the President said rue-\nThey are justifiably afraid of\nfully. Not long ago Dr. Wriston,\narms cutbacks, we agreed.\nformer president of Brown Uni-\nWhat then, I asked, was the\nversity, had told him that if Fed-\nalternative?\neral grants for research relating\nThe President cheered up a bit.\nto military and para-military mat-\nIn a spirited fashion he began to\nters were to end, almost every\ndevelop an analogy between the\nuniversity would have to close\ncondition of American military-\nshop.\noriented industry when arms\nThis was a deplorable state of\nspending ended and that of the\naffairs, the President continued,\nEuropean nations whose produc-\nbut prevailed on many campuses\ntion facilities lay in ruins after\nthroughout the country. Only\nWorld War II.\nthose private institutions with\nThe President spoke of the in-\nenormous endowments (The\ngenious way in which Paul Hoff-\nJohns Hopkins University, of\nman, as administrator of the\nwhich his brother Milton was\nMarshall Plan, had operated. To\npresident, was one) can take that\nHoffman's way of thinking, our\nFederal research money or leave it.\ngovernment's various bureaus and\nAnother part of the complex:\nagencies would be the last to\nthe very institution from whence\nknow the requirements of the\nEisenhower had sprung. Every\nvarious devastated European in-\nbranch of the Armed Forces de-\ndustrial complexes. And so Hoff-\nmands and sometimes gets more\nman went to them and said in\nthan it needs. Then, the President\nessence: draw up your own plans\nwent on gloomily, there are the\nfor reconstruction and recovery.\nunions.\nYou know better than we do what\n27\nis required. Then get up a budg-\nHe would think that comparable\net. How much can you lay out\nmeasures could be effective with\nand how much help will you\nrespect to the American military\nneed from us?\nindustrial community when arms\nThat, the President said, ac-\nspending halted or diminished\ncounted for the speed and effi-\nsharply.\nciency of the recovery of the\nAt the risk of dwelling too\nEuropean industrial community.\nlong on the issue of armaments\nand disarmament, I posed one\nfinal question in this area, be-\ncause it could best be answered\nby a man whose vast knowledge\nof military affairs and arms is\nequally matched by his passion\nfor peace. There is probably\nno man with comparable quali-\nfications in the world.\nWe were now spending $87 bil-\nlion of our total Federal budget\nof $135 billion on arms or de-\nfense, call it what you will. These\nfigures made the military budget\nduring his Administration look\nlike carfare. The President had\nwritten, again in \"Waging Peace,\"\nthat \"so long as such proportion\nof the world's assets are wasted\non excessive arms, our ability to\nhelp poorer peoples will be sorely\nand uselessly impaired.\"\nuestion: Would the\n$5 billion anti-\nmissile missile\nsystem recently\nannounced by\nSecretary McNamara\nfall into the Presi-\ndent's category of\n\"excessive arms?\"\nI wasn't prepared for his vivid\nresponse. Five billion! That was\nonly the beginning, the President\nsaid impatiently. It would buy a\n28\nWar and Peace and the UN\nsanity-to the sane.\n1\npilot establishment, nothing else.\nAnd then we would have to go\nt was time to discuss\non and on until we had \"the\nworks.\" He drew a spiral in the\nII\nwhat the President had\nmeant when he said in 1956\nair with his forefinger as he\n\"there can be no peace without\ntalked. You'd get up into the $20\nlaw.\" Two preliminary\nbillions, then the $30 billions, and\nquestions about basic\nthe $40 billions-just for the\nassumptions: (1) Did his use of\nUnited States. Every little town\nthe word \"law\" in the context of\nand locality would insist on hav-\nworld peace imply the law of a\ning a shield. Even Gettysburg.\nworld authority, capable of en-\nAnd, soon, too, all your allies\nforcement, as distinguished from\nwill insist on having it. The Pres-\na mere set of exhortations or in-\nident had continued to trace the\njunctions, and (2) did the pro-'\nspiral until it had gone as high as\nposition \"no peace without law\"\nhis arm could reach. Right now\nembody the concept that peace\nour arms expenditures create eco-\ncannot be assured by a continued\nnomic difficulties, he said in a\narms race or an indefinite\nhard tone, as his spiraling arm\nbalance of terror, but\ndropped to his side. But, as of\nonly by universal\nnow, it is possible that we will\ndisarmament,\nhave to take on this great addi-\ntogether with es-\ntional cost.\nHe paused, swiveled to gaze\nout the window at the wind-\nstripped trees, and finally turned\nback to finish up on the anti-\nmissile missile. He thought the\nvalue of the project was still\nquestionable. Now, mind you, the\nPresident said, I wouldn't call it\na form of excessive arms, if I\nthought it would be effective. But\nI tend to agree with McNamara\nwhen he minimized the need for\nthe thing. If it's a \"thin\" defense,\nas they now describe it, it won't\nappreciably improve our defensive\nposture. And, anyway, it's still\naxiomatic that the best defense is\na perfect offense. We've got that.\nWe then moved from the un-\nthinkable, the madness, the in-\n29\ntablishment of institutions in the\nassumptions would be unnecessary,\nworld corresponding to those\nespecially in view of the Presi-\nwhich maintain law and order in\ndent's uncompromising stance dur-\nour country and others?\ning the Sucz crisis of 1956 when\nObviously, the President replied\nhe emphasized that there could be\nrather impatiently, that was the\nno double standard of law in the\nkind of law he had spoken of\nworld, i.c. one law for those op-\nwhen he said it was essential to\nposing us, another for our allies.\nworld peace. I said I had sus-\nThere could be only one law, the\npected my two questions about\nPresident had insisted then, or no\npeace. Many in the world be-\nlieved his stand had prevented\nWorld War III.\nTo get that \"one law for all in\nthe world\" Grenville Clark, a\nprominent American lawyer, cham-\npion of civil liberties and of\npeace through world federalism,\nhad drafted a set of changes that\ncould be made in the UN Charter\nand which would provide the UN\nsufficient authority to prevent war.\nThat authority, Clark had made\nclear, would be strictly limited to\nwar prevention. I hoped we\nmight now go over some of the\nmain provisions of the Clark\nproposals.\nThe President anchored on his\nglasses the better to study the\nI\nClark formula for the UN legis-\nlative body. It would eliminate\nthe one vote-per nation provision\nin the General Assembly, for one\nthing. Secondly, nations would be\ngiven voting power according to\na formula which took into ac-\ncount population and geographic\nfactors. Assuming an eventual\nmembership in the UN of about\n130 nations (all nations now\nmembers, plus those expected to\njoin) Clark had calculated a vot-\ning arrangement that goes like this:\n30\nW ar and Peace and the UN\nthey considered what they stood\nto gain if they would unite in\nRepresentatives\nTotal\nsome kind of economically-\nNations\nEach\nVotes\noriented regional federation?\n4 largest\n30\n120\nWell, the President said, they\n10 next largest\n12\n120\njust wouldn't buy it. They each\n15\n8\n120\nwanted their independence. And\n20\n6\n120\nthe reason they gave: it would\n30\n4\n120\nget each of them that one vote\n40\n3\n120\nin the UN. The idea of forming\n10 smallest\n1\n10\na powerful, regional African\ngrouping had no appeal. Now, it\nmight have had appeal if the vot-\nThe President scrutinized the\ning powers of UN members were\nformula most carefully, then\napportioned on a more realistic\nwhipped off his glasses. There\nbasis.\nwas no doubt, none at all, he\nThe make-up of the UN, he\nsaid, that we have gone over-\nwent on, is discrediting the or-\nboard in bringing into the UN\nganization. How can the General\ncertain sovereign groupings which\nAssembly function with one vote\nhave no valid claim to nation-\nfor each nation? The United\nhood. Groups which were not\nStates has the same voting\neconomically and/or politically\nstrength as the Maldive Islands\nready for nationhood and a vote\nwith-what was their population?\nin the UN. But it was not entirely\n-less than 100,000? It was like\nor even largely the fault of these\ngiving Rhode Island the same\nnew nations. It was partly the\nnumber of Representatives in the\nfault of the larger powers. They\nCongress as Texas or California\nhad expected too much, too much\nor New York. It had been and\nin too short a time.\ncontinues to be a mistake to\nThe President was reminded of\nadmit nations to the UN un-\na story. Back in 1959 DeGaulle\nqualifiedly.\nhad brought together the prime\nministers of ten or eleven African\nOW that led to the\ncountries of the \"French Com-\nN\nSecurity Council, the\nmunity.\" He had asked the Presi-\nPresident continued.\ndent to address them privately.\nIt wasn't doing its\nHe decided to begin with a ques-\njob, either. Couldn't\ntion. In view of the fact, the\ndo the job, with the\nPresident had asked the African\nveto. Why couldn't some majority\nleaders, that the world was be-\nvoting formula be worked out?\ncoming increasingly economically\nHe replaced his glasses as I\ninterdependent, why did they\nhanded him the Clark formula\nwant to go it alone? And had\nfor changing the composition of\n31\nthe Security Council.\nfied, calls for an immediate and\nIt would be as follows:\nprecisely calibrated move toward\nuniversal disarmament.\nThe executive body be en-\nlarged to seventeen members,\nhe re-configured\neach elected to a four-year\nterm by the General Assembly.\nThe U.S., U.S.S.R., China and\nT five persons, none of\nSecurity Council\nwould appoint an Inspec-\nCommission to consist\nIndia would have a representa-\nwhom would be a\ntive at all times. Four of the\neight next largest nations\nnational of any of the twelve\nwould, in rotation, be entitled\nlargest nations, and no two of\nwhom would be nationals of the\nto membership, with the pro-\nviso that two of these four\nsame nation.\nmembers should always be\nThey would conduct a world-\nfrom European nations, the\nwide Arms Census, supervise an\nother two from nations outside\narms production truce, and\nEurope. The remaining nine\neventually supervise and verify\nmembers would be chosen by\nby inspection, phased, proportion-\nthe General Assembly from\nate disarmament which would\nthe other member nations.\nleave all nations as equally strong\nor weak during the disarmament\nA simple majority would be\nperiod as they were prior to it.\nruled out. A majority of 12 out\nThe gradual and proportionate\nof the 17 votes would be re-\ngiving up of military forces and\nquired for all but the \"most im-\nweapons would take place over a\nportant\" decisions. In these cases,\nperiod of ten years at the rate of\nClark proposes that the majority\nten per cent per year.\nof 12 must include a majority of\nRather startlingly, the Presi-\neach of the two main groups of\ndent's response to this part of the\nnations, i.e. the large nations and\nClark plan was, in essence, why\nthe much more numerous groups\nwait? Of course the main goal is\nof smaller nations. The President\ncomplete disarmament. But why\nthought it all made a great deal\nnot run some experiments now?\nof sense.\nLet's open up all our bases,\nAfter going over the Clark\nnuclear launching facilities, arms\nproposals for compulsory jurisdic-\nfactories, the works-all of it\ntion by the International Court\nlocated on or west of the\nand the establishment of a World\nMississippi and invite the\nEquity Tribunal to arbitrate cases\nRussians to come in and look\nwhere legal principles were not\naround. On condition, of course,\napplicable, we moved on to the\nthat they would open up every-\nactual disarmament phase. The\nthing they had located on or\nClark plan, if adopted and rati-\nwest of the Vistula River to\n32\nWar and Peace and the UN\nwould be dispersed to avoid\ninspectors from the United States.\npower concentrations, would be\nNow these inspectors would\nhighly mobile, and would be\nsoon begin to understand the size\nlocated in defensible positions.\nand dimension of the problems\nNone of them would be sta-\nof inspection and verification.\ntioned in the larger countries.\nThey could learn a lot and then\nThe UN military staff would\nwork together to develop a\nbe under civilian control.\nformula which would be work-\nable and acceptable to both sides,\nThe President studied the\nand to the other nations, too.\nabove plan quickly and, as I had\nThe President didn't see why\nexpected, caught the ball and ran\nwe had to wait for full UN\nwith it. You'd have, he began to\nCharter revision. He knew, as only\nplan out loud, world Marshals,\na military man knows, that such\ncomparable to our U.S. Marshals.\nan experiment as he had just put\nBacked by armed forces similar\nforth could pose no real threat to\nto our National Guard. When\nthe security of either side. We\nthe U.S. Marshals go into a\nmust try! the President urged.\ntroubled area, if they can't handle\nTry and keep trying!\nit, if they can't get compliance\nThe disarmament phase of the\nwith Federal law, the Guard can\nplan for a world security system\nbe called in. You'd have the same\nwas but a relatively short-term\nthing on a world scale. Non-\nproposition. The concurrent\ncompliance with UN law and you\nbuild-up of weapons, men and\nsend in the UN forces. He or-\nmaterial for a UN Peace Force\nchestrated this point at some\nwould lead to a permanent\nlength.\nestablishment-a military one-\nwithin the UN. The President's\nnd too, he hammered away,\nthoughts on this would be most\nthe UN needs nuclear\nenlightening. In essence the plan\npower. He bore down hard\nwas this:\non the word \"nuclear.\"\nThe United Nations Peace\nThe UN can't keep the\nForce would be a heavily-\npeace with conventional\narmed and well-disciplined\nweapons alone. The President,\nworld police force. To prevent\nout of his enormous storehouse\ndomination of this Force by\nof military experience and know-\nany nation or group of nations,\nhow, put forth some brilliant\nthe number of nationals of any\ninnovations on Clark's Peace\nnation in its standing com-\nForce plan. You know, he said,\nponent would not exceed three\nway back in 1953 I proposed that\nper cent of the total strength\nthe nations turn over all nuclear\nof the Peace Force except in\nweapons to the UN, keeping only\nextreme emergencies. Units\nthat nuclear material necessary\n33\nfor peaceful purposes. The ulti-\nsupranational organization with-\nmate aim of my proposal at that\nout power, the President em-\ntime was to get those blasted\nphasized. He had said that in\nbombs out of the hands of the\n1953 at the United Nations and\nnations and into the hands of an\nhe insists on it today.\nimpartial world body.\nThe President went on to out-\ne fell silent\nline, specifically and vividly, how\nfor a moment.\nthe UN would use its nuclear\nWas the President\npower, without anyone getting\nthinking about the\nhurt. Take this example, he\npossible shock effect\nhurried on. You have two coun-\nhis ideas might have in\ntries in a border argument. The\nsome quarters? Grenville Clark had\nUN orders the matter to be taken\noften said that what the world\nto the International Court. One\nprobably needed to get moving on\nor both of the disputants refuses\ndisarmament and world law was a\nto submit to compulsory arbitra-\ntion. They build up their troops\nalong the border.\nThen your UN aerial surveil-\nlance teams report that armed\noutbreak is imminent. The UN,\nwhich by now has in its posses-\nsion a fleet of submarines armed\nwith nuclear missiles deployed\naround the world, orders one of\nthe submarines to proceed to the\narea. The world is then told that\nif firing breaks out for any reason\nwhatsoever, a tactical nuclear\nweapon will be delivered onto\nthe disputed territory. If this\nthreat fails to prevent armed\nconflict, you back it up with\naction.\nBut, the President quickly\nadded, no nuclear bomb would\never need to be delivered, he felt\nsure. The threat would be suffi-\ncient to roll back the opponents\nfrom the border-indeed all the\nway back to the International\nCourt at The Hague.\nThere can be no effective\n34\nII\" .11 and Peace and the UN\nthat long hot spring and summer\nseries of severe shocks. As to my\nof 1787 in Philadelphia where\nown thoughts during those brief\nthe Convention was underway.\nsilent seconds, it seemed to me\nHe delineated the various\nthat what the President was really\nstresses and strains within and\nsaying to the UN and about the\nwithout the thirteen states and\nUN was: Get tough! Diplomacy,\nkid gloves, cadenced speeches,\nbehind-the-scenes deals have not\nworked and won't ever work!\nDemand the men and the\nweaponry you require to do the\njob. Get rough! Get tough!\nIt came then, down to this:\nHow do you get from here to\nthere?\nThe President had long been\nguided by the early period in our\nnational life and the men who\nshaped it. Would it be stretching\nthe point too much, I asked, to\nequate the Articles of Confedera-\ntion and the problems of the\nthirteen original states, with the\npresent UN Charter and the\nproblems of the 123 nation-states\ntoday? And, if an equation could\nbe made, could the President then\nagree that a UN Charter revision\nconference, similar to the Con-\nstitutional Convention of 1787\nmight result in the carving out of\na Constitution for the World, as\nstrong, equitable and sound as\nthe U.S. Constitution?\nThe famous grin broke out.\nHere was, he said, an analogy\nwhich many Americans would\nunderstand and accept. The\nPresident then spoke, as though\nhe had struggled right along with\nJay, Madison, Washington,\nHamilton, Franklin and the\nothers, at Philadelphia during\n35\nwhy their centers of gravity\nsovereign or narrow-minded\nvaried, some having closer ties\ninterests. It was the ability and\nto foreign governments than to\nwillingness to compromise for the\nthe Confederation. The attempt\nsake of the larger interest which\nto save the Confederation by\nhad created the Constitution and\nstrengthening it faltered again\nthe strongest democracy in the\nand again. The Virginia Plan and\nworld. This could work on a\nthe New Jersey Plan were so far\nworld level.\napart that compromise appeared\nAnd the President added force-\nunattainable.\nfully, the ability and willingness\nWe both then recalled the\nto compromise might, in the end,\nwords of Chairman of the Con-\nserve to create a world constitu-\nvention, George Washington:\ntion, the provisions of which\nwould enable the world's people\n\"It is too probable that no plan\nto live without the fear of war\nwe propose will be adopted.\never happening again.\nPerhaps another dreadful con-\nHe had a proposal to make\nflict is to be sustained. If, to\nbefore I left. Why, the President\nplease the people, we offer\nasked, why can't we say that the\nwhat we ourselves disapprove,\nentire program for one year (of\nhow can we afterward defend\nthe United Nations Association)\nour work? Let us raise a\nwill be to make the United\nstandard to which the wise and\nNations a more effective instru-\nthe honest can repair; the event\nment for peace?\nis in the hand of God.\"\nI knew what he had in mind.\nIt wasn't necessary to ask him to\nspell out the details. For if\nhe same situation,\nDwight D. Eisenhower thinks the\nthe President said,\nUnited Nations Association and\ncould very well prevail\nall its members can and should\nat a United Nations\nmount such a one-year program,\nCharter Revision confer-\nthere are plenty of brains around\nence. But the lesson of\nto work out the details.\n1787 was that intelligence, the\nI stood to leave. My time had\nability to give a little, and the\nbeen up a long while ago. The\nover-riding requirements for\nPresident got up from his desk\nsurvival can prevail over\nand walked into the middle of\nthe room to say a last word. He\nwas, he maintained, essentially\nan optimist. He had always been\none and would remain so. He\nwas still hopeful that man's\nintelligence would outwit his\ninventiveness.\nNOVEMBER 1, 1968\nTO:@ @BOB HALDEMAN\nFROM: MURRAY CHOTINER\nTHE FOLLOWING STORY WAS RELEASED BY US, TO COMBAT@THE CHARGE THAT\nDICK IS NOT FOR SOCIAL SECURITY AND MEDICARE. THE STATEMENT IS FROM\nDR. FLEMMING.\nNEW YORK, NOV. 1 -- DR. ARTHUR S. FLEMMING, SECRETARY OF HEALTH,\nEDUCATION AND WELFARE UNDER PRESIDENT DWIGHT EISENHOWER HAS\nVIGOROUSLY ENDORSED@RICHARD@NIXON FOR@PRESIDENT OF THE@UNITED@STATES.\nDR. FLEMMING STATED, \"I KNOW IN LIGHT OF MY EXPERIENCES THAT MR.\nNIXON -- WILL@MOVE THE COUNTRY FORWARD@IN THE@AREAS OF HEALTH, @EDUCATION\nAND WELFARE.\"\nDR. FLEMMING NOTED, \"WHEN I ADVOCATED ADVANCES ON THE PART@OF THE\nFEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE AREAS OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE, I\nALWAYS RECEIVED VIGOROUS AND@EFFECTIVE SUPPORT FROM MR. NIXON. I KNOW,\nFOR EXAMPLE, @THAT@IT WAS THAT SUPPORT@IN A@CABINET@MEETING THAT@LED PRES\nIDENT@EISENHOWER IN 196P TO ASK THE CONGRESS FOR NEW LEGISLATION IN THE\nFIELD OF EDUCATION. THE EDUCATION BILL WAS BACKED ENTHUSIASTICALLY\nBY MR. NIXON.\"\nIN HIS ENDORSEMENT, DR. FLEMMING REITERATED WHAT HE THOUGHT WOULD\nBE THE MAJOR ACCOMPLISHMENT OF A NIXON ADMINISTRATION IN THE FIELDS OF\nHEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE. DR. FLEMMING SAID, \"I@KNOW THAT MR.\nNIXON MEANT IT WHEN HE SAID, @'I PLEDGEOMY ADMINISTRATION@TO@BE@SECOND\nTO NONE@IN ITS@CONCERN@OFR@EDUCATION. 111\nTHE@FORMER SECRETARY ALSO LISTED AS FUTURE@ACCOMPLI SHMENTSONIXON S@PLEDE\nFOR@COST OF@LIVING@INCREASES IN@SOCIAL@SECURITY@BENEFITS, ELEIMINATION\nOF THE CEILING ON EARNING FOR SOCIAL@SECURTIY RECIPIENTS, @THE@\nESTABLISHMENT OF NATIONAL@STANDARDS THAT@WOULD INCREASE@THE@LEVEL0OFO\nBENEFITS@FOR@THOSE@UNDER@PUBLIC@ASSISTANCE@AND@STRENGTHENING@OF@THE\nNATION'S MEDICARE@PROGRAMN\nDR. FLEMMING@QUOTED@FROM@MRNONIXON S@SEPN@QY@SPEECH@ON@BTHE@NATURE@OF\nTHE PRESIDENCY\" @IN@WHICHONIXON SAID,@BTHE@PRESIDENT@CANNOT@ISOLATE\nHIMSELF@FROM@THE@GREAT@INTELLECTUAL@[email protected]@THISOIS\nONE@REASON WHY I@DON'T WANT@A@GOVERNMENT OF@YES MEN. @IT'S WHY I@DO\nWANT@A@GOVERNMENT@DRAWN@FROM@POLITICS, N@ @FROM@CAREER GOVERNMENT@SERVICE,\nFROMOUNIVERSITIES, @FROM@BUSINESS, FROM THE@PROFESSIONS -- ONE@INCLUDING\nNOT ONLY@EXECUTIVES AND@ADMINISTRATORS@BUT@SCHOLARS@[email protected]\nDRN@FLEMMING@SAIDL@BI @MRN@N IXONWOULD@APPLY@THI S@CONCEPT\nOF@THE@PRESIDENCY@TO THE@AREASOOFOHEALTH, @EDUCATION AND WELFARE.\"\nEND\nNOVEMBER@1, @Q968\nTO: @@BOB HALDEMAN\nFROM: MURRAY CHOTINER\nIT IS STRONGLY SUGGESTED THAT RN, ON THE@TELETHON, @AND@WHEREVER@ELSE\nPOSSIBLE, USE@THE@MATERIEL@I@SENTOTO DICKOKLEINDIENST@SHOWING@THE\nMISREPRESENTATIONS@OF@DICKGS@POSITION0ON@SOCIAL@SECURITY@ANDEMEDICAREL\nAND@HIS@REAL@STANDN\nEND\nNOVEMBER@QL@QYVX\nTOZ@@@@@BOB@HALDEMAN\nFROMZ@@@MURRAY@CHOTINER\nTHE@FOLLOWING@IS@MATERIALLTO@BE@GIVEN@TO@SOME@NEWSPAPER@FORBITS0OWN\nINVESTIGATION.\nTHE@QYVT@FINANCIAL@STATEMENT@OF@HHH@SHOWS@OWNERSHIP@OF@QLVXV@SHARES\nLISTED@AT@DOTL@YVSNPPL@OF@GN@TN@SCHJADAHL@CORPORATION@OF@MINNESOTAN\nHE@ALSO@ACQUIRED@CONVERTIBLE@DEBENTURESN@@THE@COMPANY@ISL@IN@FACTLOA\nPACKAGING@BUSINESS@AND@RECEIVED@MANY@GOVERNMENT@CONTRACTS@FROM NASA\nARMY, NAVY AND@POLARIS.\nTHE@STOCK@JUMPED@FROM $8.000A@SHARE@IN APRIL, @1965 TO @D30. OP@A@SHARE\nIN JULY, 1967. @IT@HAS DECLINED SINCE TO $16.00 @ON NOVEMBER 1, 1968\nPRESUMABLY DUE TO MANAGEMENT, ACCORDING TO REPORTS.\nTHE COMPANY DID HAVE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS IN 1961-1962, HOWEVER, WE\nUNDERSTAND THERE WAS A MARKED INCREASE WHICH LEAD TO THE JUMP IN\nPRICE OF THE STOCK.\nQUERY NO. 1: WHEN DID HHH ACQUIRE HIS STOCK?\nQUERY NO. 2: WHEN DID THE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS INCREASE IN NUMBER\nAND VALUE?\nEND"
}