Statements of the University
Students for Law and Order
TEXT OF SPEECH DELIVERED BY
R. F. DUSSAULT ON DECEMBER 7, 1964
AT STUDENT MEETING ON CAL CAMPUS
Leaflet, early December.
The organization which I represent, University Students for Law
and Order, was organized as an alternative course of action to the so-called Free Speech
Movement. We believe that the FSM has exceeded the limits of protest acceptable to the
majority of students at our university.
There is no need nor is there any excuse for civil disobedience on
this campus. Those students involved demand protection of their rights while at the same
time they are violating our rights.
As an organization, USLO does not pretend to know solutions to the
varied and complex problems which presently confront us as students. But one fact is
undeniably clear --that unless we are willing to express ourselves as a responsible body,
we have no right to expect the continued financial support of the community at large.
As a course of action, USLO urges the students to support the
legally constituted administration of this campus on all issues until such a time as the
civil judicial authorities dictate otherwise.
We therefore request that you express your moral support of our
viewpoint by signing the petition which is now being circulated and by disassociating
yourself from the FSM.
PRESIDENT CLARK KERR WILL ADDRESS THE UNIVERSITY
AT 11:00 A.M. IN THE GREEK THEATER
Leaflet, December 7, 1964.
Before Dr. Kerr became president, the following conditions existed
on campus. In 1956 Adlai Stevenson, Democratic party nominee for the presidency of the
United States, was not allowed to speak on this campus. He was a political speaker and for
that reason was not allowed to appear.
Before President Kerr took his present position the governor of
California could not even address a political-science class in session here on campus.
Today, speakers may talk on any subject. An example of this is the appearance of a Nazi,
Sergeant Forbes, last spring.
Through the direction, support, and energies of President Clark
Kerr the OPEN FORUM has been initiated, and the SPEARERS' BAN LIFTED. More liberalization
of regulations at the university has taken place in the past six years, under Kerr's
direction, than happened in the ninety years before he assumed the presidency.
This man, Clark Kerr, speaks today in the Greek Theater at 11:00
FSM, WHERE NOW???
Leaflet, December 9, 1964.
"Support the Academic Senate" is the new slogan heard
around the troubled Cal campus. Why?
Because the Academic Senate has supported the FSM.
"Down with the administration" is another popular but
slightly hackneyed slogan resounding from the Terrace to the Steps of Sproul Hall. Why?
Because the administration will not be intimidated by the tactics
or demands of the FSM. Because the laws and statutes of California say it CANNOT.
If the Regents approve the Academic Senate Resolution passed on
December 8 then we can look forward to a new slogan "Support the Regents." If
instead they choose to stay within the present interpretation of state law and reject the
proposal we shall hear, "Down with the Regents!"
The next step is to change state law. If the voters refuse to do
this, what? "Down with the State"? Will this be the next cry? Don't fool
yourself. FSM is not going to stop now! A "victory rally" today at noon. Another
rally tomorrow. They're not going to stop so long as so many are under their control.
In a press conference after the Academic Senate meeting yesterday
Mario Savio warned the Regents and the statethat if the senate resolution were not
rubber-stamped then the university could expect further trouble. Mario Savio WARNED the
Regents and the state.
We of the University Students for Law and Order wish to make it
clear that we are firmly opposed to any further disruptions on this campus. That we
continue our activity under this uneasy truce demonstrates that we do not believe the FSM
will stop. No matter what concessions are granted to them, they will continue towards
their purpose of bringing ALL wheels to a grinding halt.
WATCH AND WAIT!!!
FSM, WHAT NEXT????
Leaflet, December 14, 1964.
Pardon us for patting our own backs. But a prediction by
University Students for Law and Order that the FSM is not going to stop is being proven
daily. Savio and other FSM officials have taken their "crusade" to the country.
Mario's departure for his national tour came shortly after revealing to the press that he
was "tired of rallies" and that he was going to resume his function as a
student. The next day, in New York, after directing several weak rallies on campuses
across the country, he threatened a massive rally in New York City's Times Square
Evidently Savio's "protest" across the nation is falling
flat. What has he left in his wake at this university? Faculty members on both sides of
the issue have threatened to resign. An unresolvable dilemma has been raised. Recruitment
of new faculty, with the situation at such a crucial stage, is impossible. Democratic
ideals have been flaunted in the name of democracy and threats of continuing these flaunts
have been made. A Latin-American style of government is being initiated --stability is
fighting against instability.
At Penn State, where Savio spoke, university President Walker said
that the FBI had informed him last March that there would be "an organized
attempt, using bogus students and bogus faculty members, to divert the energies of
students into channels embarrassing to our universities." He further said that they
would be using slogans like "Free Speech" to achieve their goals.
Whatever decision is made by the Regents must be accepted by the
university, whether we agree with it or not. It is only when the legally constituted
authority is recognized that the university can continue to function. It is only when the
divisive tactics predicted last March are repudiated that the framework of law and order
If the FSM refuses to abide by the decision of the Regents, it is
their prerogative. But let them challenge this decision in the courts. Are they so afraid
that their position is legally indefensible that they will refuse to do this? Or are they
rallying students to revolt for revolution's sake?
What is the position of FSM? Why are its leaders turning to the
nation in an attempt to heap discredit upon the university? Why do they refuse so
categorically to follow the judicial processes on which America was founded? When will
they be satisfied? Where will their putsch end?
WHAT VICTORY WILL BE GAINED BY THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR UNIVERSITY?
NOW TIME TO THINK . . .
Leaflet, December 17, 1964.
USLO does not advocate either the acceptance or the rejection of
the Academic Senate proposal. We continue to publish for one principal reason: we firmly
believe that the Regents will not, in fact, accept the proposal in its entirety. The
reasons behind our belief are, in part:
1. There is no reason for this governing body to abdicate any of
its power. It would if it accepted the proposal.
2. In light of past decisions of the Regents, we feel that they
will continue to maintain the balance of its power as the final controlling body over this
3. In a recent court decision, Wilkenson vs. Ohio State
University, the court maintained that it was not only the right, but the responsibility
of the president to regulate student activity both on and off campus, and that the
president had the right to regulate THE CONTENT OF SPEECHES ON THE
Assuming then, that the Regents do reject or at least defer the
proposal, or any part of the proposal, WHAT WILL BE THE FSM's COURSE OF ACTION? We believe
that renewed demonstrations and strikes will occur in an attempt to completely
"bring the wheels to a grinding halt."
It must be emphasized that each and every student who supports or
honors future FSM demonstrations and/or strikes will have to realize his responsibility
for the probable consequence: legislative control of the University of California. The
public at large feel that they have an investment to protect here, and that they cannot
permit chaos to prevail.
The immediate goals of the FSM are exemplified in the five points
of the Academic Senate proposal. Many responsible and dedicated people have worked, and
continue to work, to achieve these points through peaceful negotiation. Don't be
led into believing that strikes and demonstrations are the ONLY solution.
The ends do not justify the means, especially in regard to the
ends and means now in question upon this campus.
A little foresight should reveal that a future strike, or any
other disruptive action on this campus, will completely destroy any hope of attainment of
We submit, for the benefit of all, that the Regents' decision be
accepted. Further action must be limited to the courts and other legal bodies.
DO NOT SUPPORT FURTHER DEMONSTRATIONS --EMPLOY LEGAL CHANNELS!