Seventy-seven years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan
under authority of Board in Control of Student Publications
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 764-0552
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily exp ress the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

What

happened

at

Berk eley?

WEDNESDAY, JULY 10, 1968

NIGHT EDITOR: MARCIA ABRAMSON

k


The interim danger
of' interim, rules

Ever since the Free Speech Movement of 1964 rocked the
Berkeley campus of the University of California and marked the
beginning of the era of new student militancy, that campus has
been the focal point of the further radicalization of America's
university population. Ten days ago, Berkeley erupted again,
this time into a violent, destructive melee between police and
the most radical of the students and non-students who populate
the city.
On this page, The Daily offers some information from "in-
side" Berkeley, in an attempt to clarify both the events of that
weekend, and the motivations of the people involved.
Arlene Bergman is a writer for the Movement newspaper in
the Bay area, and an active member of, Berkeley's radical left.
Her article is an explanation, from the inside, of the motiva-
tions. of the Berkeley radicals who precipitated last week's
activity.
Eldridge Cleaver, Black Panther Party Minister of Infor-
mation and author of "Soul on Ice" (and recently released from,
Jail, where he had been kept while accused of parole violation)'
delivered the speech transcribed here to 3000 Berkeley listeners
on the third night of trouble.
Susie Schmidt, acting editor of the College Press Service
and former editor of the University of Colorado Daily, reports
on the progression of events and their causes during the Berkeley
rioting.
Miss Bergman's story and Mr. Cleaver's speech came to The
Daily via Liberation News Service - Student Communications
Network; Miss Schmidt's article was provided by College Press
Service. - Ed.

By SUSIE SCHMIDT
BERKELEY - Less than two
weeks after the beginning of
the University of California's sum-
mer session, its students are em-
broiled in a new movement, one
aiming toward a "Free City."
They want control of "their"
city and "their" streets near tloe
university campus, and they want
the right to congregate there free
of police control. That purpose
has placed them in direct con-
frontation with the city's politi-
cal and military powers, whose
primary aim is keeping large con-
gregations of students off the
streets.
For two nights, groups of sev-
eral thousand students fought po-
lice in an attempt to "liberate"
the mile-square section of the city
where most of them-live.
Police weapons were clubs, tear
gas, and a 7 p.m. curfew over the
"student" half of Berkeley. The
students' weapons have been large
numbers and a determination not
to be bullied, which has only been
fed by two nights of battle.
W HA T I S HAPPENING in
Berkeley is a clue to the mood of
the young and disaffiliated across
the country, and it is in some

THE ADMINISTRATION and; the fac-
ulties of the schools and colleges,
through their mishandling of the delicate
problem of interim rules, are pushing the
University down a pointless road toward
possible strife.
We do not disparage the motives of the
men involved; we do not think they are
acting in bad faith. But we do take vehe-
ment exception to what they are doing
and their reasons for doing It.
To soothe the Regents' impatience with
delays in implementing the proposals for
a tripartite University Council (which,
when established Would' make rules on
disruptive student conduct), President
Fleming asked the deans of the schools
and colleges to assure him that their
units either had or would devise interim
rules.
Now the deans have reported back to
Fleming; almost all of the schools and
colleges have merely adopted the rules
passed last October by Student Govern-
ment Council as their own.
FLEMING FEELS interim rules are nec-
essary, and he objects to the existing
SGC rules on legal and philosophical!
grounds. If an incident were to occur be-
fore the implementation of the Univer-
sity Council, he reasons, the University
would be criticized for not having clari-
fied its rules - especially in the light of
disruptive student incidents at other
campuses this summer.
Furthermore, since SGC never had/ a
Regental mandate to pass rules, a stu-
dent penalized by Joint Judiciary Coun-
cil under SGC rules could challenge the
penalty in civil courts and win, accord-,
ing to Fleming. And he doesn't agree that
students alone should make rules on dis-
ruptive student conduct; such conduct,
he feels, strikes at the basic tenet of the
Univrsity - freedom of speech and free
interchange of ideas - and thus affects
ilt members of the "University commun-
ity."
THERE IS MUCH that is wrong with all
of this. Although most of the faculty
rules were merely lifted from the SGC
code, students did not in any way make
the rules, the use of SGC rules is merely
a paternalistic faculty gift.
That this distinction is important be-
comes evident by examining the code of
Second class postage paid at Ann Arbor, Michigan,
420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Michigan. 48104.
DaIly except Sunday and Monday during regular
summer session.

one of the colleges which did not use
SGC's regulations. The first draft of the
rules being considered by the graduate
school includes' a number of provisions
which have nothing to do with "disrup-
tive student conduct," including a rule
against the use of narcotics on University
property (see letter on this page). If
nothing else, these rules constitute a
serious danger of double jeopardy, when
coupled with existing civil statutes.
Worse, the interim procedures mean
interim faculty adjudication, in direct
violation of University' policy for the past
few years that students should be tried
by their peers. Student representation on
faculty boards which will try student
cases ranges, depending on the college,
from little to nothing.
,TILL WORSE, the rationale behind
these moves is extremely tenuous.
This is a quiet campus, and the only
visible threat to the peace is the insist-
ence of the administration and faculty
of passing needless rules to govern non-
existent incidents. SGC has passed rules;
if they are of shaky legality, the Regents
can as easily ratify SGC's legislative
authority as allow the faculty to make'
rules. If disruptive student conduct is a
problem which affects the entire Univer-
sity community, how does it in any way
follow that rule-making authority should
be in effect taken away from one group
in the community (the students) and
handed over to another (the faculty)?
And if President Fleming is soconcerned
with conduct which strikes at the free
interchange of ideas, what about classi-
fied research, where other scholars in
the community are denied the knowledge
gained through another's research be-
cause of government contract restric-
tions?
Even if all the recent maneuverings of
Fleming, the deans, and the various col-
leges' faculty executive committees were
of a worthy, commendable nature, they
seem unnecessary at this moment; the
disruption that is hoped to be avoided by
having such rules will possibly come only,
if the administration and the faculty in-
sist on foisting them upon a convenient-
ly muffled student body. But if the
rules and events are not so commendabl%
and worthy - as indeed they are not -
they are not only unnecessary, they are
fully reprehensible.
--URBAN LEHNER
-DANIEL OKRENT
Co-Editors

A black man's fury and anger

By ELDRIDGE CLEAVER
BERKELEY-All power to the
people! Black power to black
people!
I can't tell you that when I
heard about what was going on
over here in Berkeley I sat down
cried; I didn't cry. It was sad. I
heard they were cracking heads
over here, that they were shooting
tear gas at people, and that they
even imposed a curfew. I said,
"Get out of my house, man. You're
lying." But it was true! Do you
believe it yet? Well, you better
believe it, because this sh-t is just
getting started. That's right.
That's right. That's right.
They will shoot you. They will
beat you to death with those
sticks. They will put you in prison,
where you can't make no bail.
A LITTLE history tells us that
in Germany when Hitler got that
power, he killed .a whole lot of
people. We can't do that over here,
can we? Lyndon Johnson wouldn't
do it, he wouldn't allow it. This
man has taken the oath of office.
The man is bound by the Con-
stitution. He is bound by the will
of the people, so he wouldn't do
nothing like that.
But what we better begin to un-
derstand 'is that those pigs out
there, they can't think well enough,
to listen to what they hear. They
can't think like that. The only
thing that they can do is to whip
what head they're told to whip.
They'll whip any head they're told
to whip, and they were told to
start whipping these white heads
in Berkeley because this sh-t's
getting out of hand. Too many
people going around doing what
they want to do. You're slapping
and clapping and smiling, but
you're getting yourselves ready to
get killed. Because these pigs are
serious. They're carrying out ord-
ers made by men on the highest
level in this country.

THEY'RE SERIOUS about it
and you're still smiling about it, but
I understand why you're smiling.
You're smiling because you have
confronted these pigs and they
have been exposed for what they
are, the enemies of the people.
That's what they are, the enemies
of the people, the enemies of the
people.
The man is a public servant.
We're dealing with public servants
who have gotten so arrogant they
think they own this country. They
think they own this country. They
think they own the people in it.
They think they own you. You
think they just believe they own
these black people. No, they ,whip-'
ped you last night just like they
think they own you, the night be-
fore, or whenever that was. They
whip you like you belong to them.
You were their property. They had
a right to do that. That's what
they're saying. They're telling
everybody that we're doing this
in Berkeley so you know what
they'll do everywhere else. That's
what they're saying, you see, but
there are more people in this
country than there are pigs. That's
right. That's right.
AND ALL THOSE people (the
city council) that they had up
here on the stage deliberating the
situation, they're crazy or some-
thing, because what is there to
deliberate? We know that those
pigs were wrong for doing that.
Who told them to do that? And
what are they going to do about
it? They're going to let you come
back on the streets tonight, if you
be good. But what are they doing?
This is your city council. You
placed them in office to admin-
ister your laws for your benefit
and for your welfare, not to line
their pockets, not to get fat, not
to send their pigs down here to
whip your heads. That's not where
it's at. That's not it.
So you, you're going to have to

stand up and tell these people
that you don't belong to them but
they belong to you. As long as
they're drawing their salary from
your paycheck, or from your ma-
ma's, or your papa's, or from any-
body else's in this country. And
there are certain things that we
just can't have. We can't have
decisions made on who knows
where to close the streets down.
We can't have someone telling
us when we can come out and
walk up and down the streets. We
can't have someone deciding that
the ideas that are floating around
this university community should
not be discussed.
They deprive you of your rights.
They deprive you of your right to
assemble and discuss your griev-
ances. They have gone to the root
of what this sh-t is all about.. ..
SO YOU EITHER have to sub-
mit to a government that is func-
tioning without a constitution or
do what your ancestors did and
get a government and a consti-
tution of the people, for the peo-
ple and by the people,not by the
pigs. Not by the pigs.
No, no, no, . . . We can't have
a government by the pigs. We
can't have that, because we know
how foul they are. We all know
that.
I have had occasion to live un-
der a government of the pigs, by
the pigs and for the pigs. I am
speaking of the California ie-
partment of Correction: Kid-
napers! They kidnaped me! They
spirited me away and hid me in a
cell and told me that they had a
right to do all of that and I didn't
have a right to say anything about
it. They said just shut up and
you'll get out of here soon. But
this judge, this judge-who may
be the only judge left in this
country who knows anything about
the Constitution said: Wait a
minute pigs. That's what he told
them. That's what he told them
you see.
HE TOLD THEM they were
foul-'I'm paraphrasing here-and
that they were holding me for a
political purpose and "cut him
loose forthwith." That's what he
told them. He told that one day.
The last word there was "forth-
with." They interpreted that to
mean like, "tomorrow." Pigs to the
bitter end!
But that's not enough. That
wasn't really the end. I thought
that was the end. Today they
called me down to my parole of-
ficer's office. I have a new parole
officer. The other one they sent
to Stockton. The new one called
me down and gave me a letter
addressed to me from Mr. Kerr,
the chairman of the Adult Au-
thority, and to my surprise, the
letter told me to report Monday,
3 o'clock, to San Quentin State
Prison for a hearing on charges
of 'parole revocation. That hap-
pened this afternoon, you see. I
can't relate to that; I can't relate
to Mr. Kerr at his penitentiary.
No, I cannot relate to that because
the man is wrong, and I have
done nothing more than what I
am doing here now-talking sh-t
to people that they don't want to
hear,
That's the only way it can be.
It's gotta be that way. It's gotta
be that way, because they can do
it to me. They've done it. They're
doing it to a lot of people right
now, thousands of people, and
they can do that because those
prisoners are hidden away and
because people don't care about
what's going on there.
THEY CAN DO it to you.
So what we gotta do in this
country is to dispel all these lies
they have around that people are
impotent, that the people can no
longer control their destiny, that
the two party system, the Repub-

sense analogous to the city ghet-
tos; what is happening here is an
example of an indigenous com-
munity trying to assert itself in
the face of legal and political
pressure.
The initial confrontation start-
ed out looking and sounding like
a picnic. The usual Friday-night
things were happening on Tele-
graph Ave., Berkeley's social cen-
ter, and the usual Friday-night
people, looking for action, were
congregating and heading there
from side streets in every direc-
tion. Many of them thought they
might stop for a while 'at the
corner of Telegraph and Haste,
where a planned demonstration
of solidarity with the striking stu-
dents and workers of France was
being staged by 'nine local radi-
cal groups, including the Trotsky-
ite Young Socialist Alliance (YSA)
and the California Peace and
Freedom Party. It was still light.
FROM A loudpeaker on the
rooftop came the voice of Berke-
ley police chief William Beale tell-
ing the crowd the demonstration
had been declared an "unlawful
assembly" and commanding them
to disperse. That announcement
brought to the surface the emo-
tions that were pushing the stu-
dent crowd 'toward its .own mo-
ment of decision to confront the
police. A man they couldn't even
see was telling them that the rally
they had worked so hard to keep
legal was "unlawful," seemingly
only because there were too many
students in one place.,
's our street," they shouted
back to the microphone. When it
ordered them to disperse "in the
name of the people," they cried
"We are the people!" with; a des-"
peration in their voices that some-
how told what the whole thing
was about.
From that point the fight was
inevitable; the police had come
itching for it and the crowd, if it
hadn't, felt bullied into a corner
from which it could not peacefully
walk away. The only remaining
questions were timing and tactics.
T H E Y S A organizers went
through the motions of moving
the crowd back to the .sidewalks
from which it had been inching'
forward, and of asking the chief
if the rally could continue peace-
fully without the police. Beale
went through the motions of con-
sidering the proposal before re-
jecting it.
The gold helmets lined up at
the north end of the block in four
deep rows, ready to walk south,
Half the crowd yelled not to give
way, to resist and fight back; the
other half turned and walked or
ran away from the invading
forces. After a long face-to-face
moment the cops advanced; the
crowd was swept into the next
block or into stores along the
street. At the end of the block
most of the students circled
around through alleys and side
streets to regroup behind the
police.
The cops obligingly reversed
their direction and put on gas
masks, preparing to march back
up the street and push the dem-
onstrators up toward the campus.
The first canisters of tear gas
were thrown onto the street. The
crowd fled to the next corner, and
so it went for an hour-an attack
of gas would force the crowd to
disperse momentarily, only to re-
group at the next intersection,
AFTER TWO more frontal at-
tacks the students began setting
fires in sidewalk trash cans and
throwing rocks at passing "pigs"
(police cars). After the initial
shock of the gas and the strength
of the police contingent wore off,
the crowd took on spme of its ni-

tial carnival-like mood again.
They were playing a game called
"fight the cops" - a serious game
only to the extent of their frus-
tration at being pushed ;around
by hundreds of cops with tear gas
The crowd became almost light-
hearted as they ran from corner
to corner, away from the choking
cloud of gas. They stopped to help.
one another, to offer Kleenex or
wet handkerchiefs. Those who
were "old-timers" to tear gas
shouted instructions to neophytes;
small groups' scouted , for water
fountains and pointed others to-
ward them.
About midnight the confronta-
tion moved onto the campus, and
the students scattered in saller
and 1smaller groups, some setting
small fires in their wake. Tar gas
floated in clouds over Sproul Hall
Plaza, the scene of countless stu-
dent harangues , and demonstra-
tions. At 1 a.m. the police tactic
of "divide and scatter" had suc-
ceeded in fragmenting the crowd.
But the nekt night the students
were' back - this time blocking
off Telegraph Ave. and turning It
into a community park. A band
played, people danced, joints w 'e
passed down the -street. Peoe
stood in groups talking, laughing,
and drinking beer. Signs chalked
on the street quoted Che Guevara,
and Mao Tse-Tung, and pro-
claimed Telegraph a "liberated.
area." Barricades' at the ends of
Telegraph and on each side street
were erected, torn down and
erected again as the core of ac-
tivists argued about whether the
cops would come and what to do
when they did.
THEY CAME; this time they
ran faster and from more direc-
tions and used their clubs as well
as their tear-gas cannisters. This
time the crowd broke windows aiid
set bigger fires, but- the end was
the same - chaos, confusion, and
eventual breaking of ranks into
groups too small to accomplish
anything.
The next morning the police im-
posed a curfew and the students
solidified their raison d'etre into
a set of demands on the city coun-
cil. They want to be able to stop
auto traffic on Telegraph so the
street can be used for whatever
purpose the community decides it
should be used, free of police oc-
cupation. They want the Berkeley
police to be split into forces cor-
responding to the different indi-
genous communities in the city, to'
be placed under the communities'
control. They also vow to defy the
police curfew.
What is happening in Berkeley
may signal a new tone in student
uprisings in this country. The stu-
dents were not revolting against
the university (they- were in fact
careful not to damage any of
"their" buildings, looking at the
campus as something like a cita-
'del to be defended against inva-
sion by the police), or against
CIA recruiters or. the war in Viet-
nam.. They were fighting back
against forces by which they feel
repressed, fighting for the right
to control and make decisions
about the community they make
up in Berkeley.
THERE WERE here, as in most
confrontations of this kind, the
questions of how much violence
could have been, avoided had the
cops stayed home, and of ho.
much either side wanted to avoid
violence. The answer to the first'
was fairly obvious to most observ-
ers: had the police decided not to
make an issue of the crowds in
the streets of Berkeley, the first
night would most likely have pro-
duced a rather dull demonstration
and the next would have been
nothing more than p groovy street
dance.

k

I*
1'


4.

Letters: A response to tentative rules

4.

The following is a letter sent
by several members and officers
of Graduate Assembly to Dean
Stephen Spurr of the Graduate
School, in response to Dean
Spurr's request for their com-'
ment on the school's proposed
interim conduct rules.-Ed.
Dear Dean Spurr:
IN REPLY to your request, this
letter is an expression of our
views concerning the document
on graduate student conduct to be
voted upon by the Executive Board
of the Graduate School. We would
like to make the following com-
ments concerning it.
First, and this is from a proce-
dural standpoint, we were quite
surprised to realize that only one
aspect of the document, and a
relatively minor one at that, was
ever brought to the attention of-
any member of the Graduate As-
sembly. All. other parts of the'
document have only now come be-
fore us and with the additional
burden that we comment upon
them within a matter of days.
Since hurried legislation is very
often poor legislation we could
never accept such a document, re-
gardless of its merits, until we had
some time, certainly more than a
few days, to suggest what we felt
were appropriate changes.
Second, concerning the substan-
tive aspects of the document, there'
are a number of points with which
we strongly disagree:
1. ON THE second page of the
document, the following statement

ment or program. The student
will always have the right to
being presented with the evi-
dence against him, to a formal
or informal hearing, to being
able to present evidence in his
own behalf, and the right of
appeal of the Executive Board.
Our position as individuals and
the position of the Graduate As-
sembly as a whole with regard to
this has really been quite simple
-No group (or individual within
a group) in the graduate' school,
regardless of prestige or size,
which does not consist wholly of
students, has the right or privi-
lege to discipline any student for
words or action or failure of ac-
tion of a non-academic nature.
We consider academic behavior to
be behavior of intellectual compe-
tence only, i.e., mastery of the
curriculum specifications of the
departments or schools. All other
behavior is non-academic.
As to who shall discipline stu-
dents for non-academic behavior
should such behavior seriously and
negatively affect other "elements
of the University community," the
answer is, as we have already stat-
ed, other students.
2. THUS FAR, we have said no-
thing about who shall legislate
the rules. In yor document, the
following is stated with regard to
this issue:
All elements of the Univer-
sity, community are affected by
the behavior of individuals, re-
gardless of status, when acting
:ift _i . f--'l. m mm n~ T a

use of University documents, re-
cords, or identification;
3. Obstruction or disruption of
teaching, research, administra-
tion, disciplinary procedures, or
other University activities, in-
cluding its public service func-
tions, or of other authorized ac-
tivities on University premises;
4. Physical abuse of any per-
son on University-owned or
-controlled property or at Uni-
versity-spon'sored or -supervised
functions or conduct which
threatens or endangers the
health or safety of any such
person;
5. Theft of or damage to prop-
erty of the University or of a
member of 'the University com-
munity or campus visitor;
6. Unauthorized entry to or
use of University facilities;
7. Violation of University pol-
icies or of campus regulations
including campus regulations
concerning the registration of
student organizations, the use
of University facilities, or the
time, place, and manner of pub-
lic expression;
8. Use, possession, or distribu-
tion of narcotic or dangerous
drugs on University-owned or
-controlled property or at Uni-
versity-sponsored or -supervised
functions except as expressly
permitted by law;
9. Violation of rules governing
residence in University-owned or
-controlled property;
10. Disorderly conduct or lewd,
indecent, or obscene conduct or

Inasmuch as 10 of the 12 stan-
dards listed are non-academic
(the two which we consider to be
academic are the first and last),
we, of course, cannot accept the
Graduate School's right to dis-
cipline according to them. But
more importantly, we cannot ac-
cept the Graduate School's right
to even make these rules. Again,
we invoke a basic tenet of demo-
cratic life, namely that rules, or
laws, or "standards" designed to
provide for the minimal function-
ing of a community, shall be made
and approved by those affected by
them. Therefore, such rules which
apply solely to students ought to
be made solely by students and
such rules which apply to broader
segments of the University com-
munity ought to be made by a
composition of those segments.
This procedure appears in the
newly proposed Regents By-law
prescribing for the formation of a
University Council.
3. ONE LAST POINT. It is ra-
ther clear that this document
which we have been asked to com-
ment upon, though interim in na-
ture, is now being rushed to ac-
ceptance because of the Regental
demand for law and order in the
-wake of campus disruptions all
across the country. We are not at
all surprised since such a demand
is the typical response of the
powers-that-be in such situations.
Nonetheless, we do not intend to
bend in the face of such authori-
tarian tactics and pressures. All
we can say to you by way of pos-
nihl irwi t "+% # n. a i

Radical confessions

By ARLENE E. BERGMAN
BERKELEY (LNS-SCN)-Sun-
day night (June 30),, there was
a man playing a guitar, ,walking
up University Ave. He was singing
"The Times, They Are A-Chang-
ing'.' Behind him there was a
throng of several hundred people.
By the time they turned the cor-
ner nearly every window on the
block was broken.
In 24 hours, other people were
petitioning the city council for a
permit to have a mass meeting on
Telegraph Avenue July 4.
People have fought hard in the
streets. All the rules of previous
demonstrations have been broken.
The cops used gas on a massive
scale. We retaliated, for the first
time, by stoning windows. They
deployed goon squads in unmarked
cars. We set barricades on fire
and someone even had the balls,
to set a cop on fire. They pro-
claimed a curfew and established,
martial law in Berkeley,
When we broke the rules of the
demonstration game, we were as-
serting our right to control our
own community. We were chal-
lenging the establishment's defi-,
nition of "law and order." We
were taking what we know is ours.

means that the cops are disarmned
and all non-Berkeley forces are
withdrawn from the area. This.
means that the city of Berkeley
abolishes its draft board or ap-
points a draft board that refuses
to comply with the Selective
Service System.
THIS MEANS that the trus-
tees' power over the university be
delegated to a democratically
elected board of students, facul-
ty and community people. This
means that the city council meet-
ings be open to discuss these is-
sues and other community needs,
and to plan a new participatory
form of city government.
TRADITIONALLY we have had
massive confrontations with the
cops. But people learned a lot
these past few days. Sometimes
the most effective actions can't
be publicized at mass meetings.
Most of the time, going en masse
into a phalanx of cops pis suicide.
Probably our biggest tactical ad-
vantage last weekend was our
ability to break into small groups
that could move where the cops
could not. Each group was diver-
sionary. Cops had just too much
territory to cover.
Some will say that unless we

Al