Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
Memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN about John Alexander's visit concerning RN's estate planning, including shorthand notes. 1 pg. [Memo], 6/23/1972
Follow up memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN re: John Alexander's communication and concerns re: RN's estate planning. 1 pg. [Memo], 6/15/1972
Father's Day card from Julie and David to RN. Includes card and envelope. 3 pgs. [Other Document], n.d.
Memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN re: Father's Day card from Julie. 1 pg. [Memo], n.d.
Letter and envelope from Julie to RN re: attached cartoon of PN. 3 pgs. [Letter], 6/13/1972
Memo from RN to Mitchell, cc: Haldeman, Colson re: Buchanan's critical assessment of '72 campaign organization (compared to '68). 2 pgs. [Memo], 6/12/1972
Draft of memo from RN to Mitchell, cc: Haldeman, Colson re: Buchanan's critical assessment of '72 campaign organization (compared to '68). 2 pgs. [Memo], n.d.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26125970
label
WHSF: Returned, 3-6
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26125970
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Returned, 3-6
description
This file contains:
Memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN about John Alexander's visit concerning RN's estate planning, including shorthand notes. 1 pg. [Memo], 6/23/1972
Follow up memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN re: John Alexander's communication and concerns re: RN's estate planning. 1 pg. [Memo], 6/15/1972
Father's Day card from Julie and David to RN. Includes card and envelope. 3 pgs. [Other Document], n.d.
Memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN re: Father's Day card from Julie. 1 pg. [Memo], n.d.
Letter and envelope from Julie to RN re: attached cartoon of PN. 3 pgs. [Letter], 6/13/1972
Memo from RN to Mitchell, cc: Haldeman, Colson re: Buchanan's critical assessment of '72 campaign organization (compared to '68). 2 pgs. [Memo], 6/12/1972
Draft of memo from RN to Mitchell, cc: Haldeman, Colson re: Buchanan's critical assessment of '72 campaign organization (compared to '68). 2 pgs. [Memo], n.d.
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Returned White House Special Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26125970
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c8be080092f73851
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
White House Special Files Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
3
6
06/23/1972
Memo
Memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN about
John Alexander's visit concerning RN's estate
planning, including shorthand notes. 1 pg.
3
6
06/15/1972
Memo
Follow up memo from Rose Mary Woods to
RN re: John Alexander's communication and
concerns re: RN's estate planning. 1 pg.
3
6
n.d.
Other Document
Father's Day card from Julie and David to
RN. Includes card and envelope. 3 pgs.
3
6
n.d.
Memo
Memo from Rose Mary Woods to RN re:
Father's Day card from Julie. 1 pg.
3
6
06/13/1972
Letter
Letter and envelope from Julie to RN re:
attached cartoon of PN. 3 pgs.
3
6
06/12/1972
Memo
Memo from RN to Mitchell, cc: Haldeman,
Colson re: Buchanan's critical assessment of
'72 campaign organization (compared to '68).
2 pgs.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Page 1 of 2
Box Number Folder Number Document Date
Document Type
Document Description
3
6
n.d.
Memo
Draft of memo from RN to Mitchell, cc:
Haldeman, Colson re: Buchanan's critical
assessment of '72 campaign organization
(compared to '68). 2 pgs.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Page 2 of 2
June 23, 1972
MR. PRESIDENT:
One day last week John Alexander stopped in to
see me for a few minutes. He expressed great concern about
your estate planning.
Then on June 15, he called me and said the situation
has gotten worse since he had been in my office.
He said that he and Dick Ritzel think it is essential
that they talk with you on the telephone for a few minutes and that
they then come in to see you.
Yesterday John Alexander called again. I explained
that you have been extremely busy -- that I have not had a chance
to see you but promised that I would bring this up today.
After talking with him, I feel it is very important
that you talk with them on the telephone -- and then you can decide
whether you see them in person.
THANKS. Rus May
Rose Mary Woods
/
20
/
-
/ 2/1 y > H
N
+
+ No / r
!
Rmw
June 15, 1872
MR. PRESIDENT
John Alexander was in the other day and mentioned that he
is quite concerned about your estate planning.
Today he called and said "back on that same subject that I
touched base with you on. The thing has gotten worse, much
worse.
Dick Ritzel and I think we need to see him and would like to talk
with him on the telephone for a few minutes before we come to
see him.
I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT -- rmw
June 23, 1972
John Alexander called again yesterday and I explained how
busy you have been - that, in fact, I had not had an opportunity
to see you.
He is most anxious to talk with you - as is Ritzel -- and he
feels it is most important that this be as soon as humanly possible.
THANKS
RmWoods
Eisewhaver
REMEMBERING
LOVE PM
13 A JUN
POW-MIA AGRIFICE
FOR FRE
19721
The
as The
President
"PRIOR"
8 21 8 2!
The white House
washing ton, D.C.
20500
If you think that just because
It's FATHER'S DAY,
you deserve
to have
someone
tell you
how
GREAT
and
TERRIFIC
you are,
you're WRONG-
You deserve it ALL YEAR!
You're
GREAT
and
TERRIFIC!
HAPPY
FATHER'S
DAY
we leneyon!
Julie and David
MR. PRESIDENT:
Obviously from Julie for Father's Day.
Also - the advance copy of her article on
you in the Journal.
Have a good time - relax.
Happy Father's Day --
Rosey
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Dear Daddy,
J did not hant
you to miss seeing Mis!
Love always,
Julie
June 13,1992
Record Boston American
Editorials
THE WHITE HOUSE OFFICE
Daddy
7.4
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 12, 1972
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
MEMORANDUM FOR JOHN MITCHELL
COPIES FOR
Bob Haldeman
Chuck Colson
FROM THE PRESIDENT
@
In reading Buchanan's analysis, you will note he is highly
critical of our organization compared to what we had in 1968.
I am inclined to think that some of his criticism may be
justified and that some of it may miss the mark, but at least
we should have it in mind as we build the organization for the
fulure.
In 1968 when we were the outs we naturally had more volunteers
and more zeal and determination than we perhaps have in 1972.
On the other hand, there is no reason why we cannot have in
1972 a considerable degree of fire and enthusiasm if we can
only charge up the troops effectively. I think one danger that
must be guarded against is to over-pay people or to have staffs
that are too large. It is certainly true that too large a paid
staff means a staff that is somewhat fat and lazy. I am not
suggesting that ours is either at this point, but the Buchanan
criticism is something that must be examined.
I am not, incidentally, so impressed with his argument that our
conservative foot soldiers were the ones who beat the union
troops in 1968. As a matter of fact, the conservatives weren't
all that enthusiastic about us in 1968 as Pat probably will
remember if he examines the situation pretty carefully and
objectively. Nevertheless, there is a need for having a lean,
hard-hitting, enthusiastic organization to combat the McGovern
organization. I think the way we can do it is to have people
who not only are for us but also by having people in our
organization who are really stirred up about the great danger
- 2 -
PERSONAL AND CONFIDENTIAL
of McGovern becoming President and who will get out and
work their heads off in order to beat him. People can get far
more excited working against a candidate than they can working
for one.
On another subject, I think it is important to keep the Republican
organization and the Citizens for Nixon or Democrats for Nixon,
or whatever we are going to call it, separated wherever possible.
We should give them each separate tasks and then have them
work both sides of the street.
Mitchell
copy to Hardkexxx Haldeman and Colson
In reading Buchanan's analysis you will note he is
highly critical of our organization compared to what we had
in 1968. I am inclined to think that some of his criticism
may be justified and klxxxxx that some of it may miss the mark
but at least we should have it in mind as we build the organization
for the future.
I¹V 1968 when we were the outs we naturally had more
volunteers and more zeal and determination than we perhaps
have in 1972. On the other hand, there is no reason why we
cannot have in 1972 a considerable degree of fire and enthusiasm
if we can only charge up the troops effectively. I think one
danger that must be guarded against NSXX is to over-pay
people or to have staffs that are too large. It is certainly true
that too large a paid staff means a staff that is somewhat fat
and lazy. I am not suggesting that ours is either at this point,
but the Buchanan criticism is something that must be examined.
I am not incidentally so impressed with his argument that
our conservative foot soldiers were the ones who beat the union
tenkxx troops in 1968. As ja matter of fact, the conservatives
weren't all that enthusiastic about us in 1968 as Pat probably
will remember if he examines the situation pretty caredully
and objectively, Nevertheless, there is a need for having a
lean, hard-hitting, enthusiastic organization to combat
the McGovern organization. I think the way we can do it is to hav e
- 2 -
people who not only are for us but also by having people that-
in our organization who are really stirred up about the great
danger of McGovern becoming President and who will get out
and work their heads off in order to beat him. People can get
far more excited working against a candidate than they can
working for one.
On another subject, I think it is important to keep the
Republican organization and the Citizens for Nixon or
Democrats for Nixon or whatever we are going to call it
organizations separated wherever possible. We should give
them each separate tasks and then have them work both sides
of the street.