Throughout these turbulent events, the central conflict at U.C. Berkeley remained much the same as it was during the Free Speech Movement. The University's administration, under the control of the highly conservative Board of Regents, wanted the campus immune from political activity and activism; while students increasingly were becoming more politically aware and active, and saw the University's restriction of political activity on campus as infringements on their constitutional rights. This adversarial atmosphere dominated Berkeley campus life during the middle and late 1960's and violence and conflict frequently continued as by-products of this atmosphere. The turbulent activity on the Berkeley campus seemed to leave an ominous example for other California universities as the late 1960's continued and 1969 approached.

In October of 1969, in contrast to the highly profiled and highly populated U.C. Berkeley campus, Humboldt State College was still merely registering its five thousandth student for the fall semester; Carl Morris from Carlotta, California.(2) Reaching five thousand students was an all time high for the still relatively small state college tucked away in the redwoods of extreme Northern California. To this point H.S.C.'s remote location and size had sheltered it from some of the major protest developments that had already become common place on university campuses in California such as U.C. Berkeley and San Francisco State. However, this small school would soon no longer be exempt from protest and turbulence. Accompanying the registration of Humboldt State's five thousandth student was the arrival of the
Vietnam protest movement at H.S.C. Its first major development was evident on October 15, 1969, when H.S.C. participated in the nation wide Vietnam Moratorium Day.

Nationally, the Moratorium was directed by a national moratorium committee lead by Sam Brown, a former student organizer from Eugene McCarthy's presidential campaign in 1968, and other former student activists with roots in the McCarthy campaign as well. The Moratorium Committee in Washington D.C. issued a statement calling for the day to be "an effort to maximize public pressure to end the war by encouraging a broad cross section of Americans to work against the war." In accordance with this direction, action was taken upon the H.S.C. campus by Associate Student Body President Waine Benedict, Vice President Patt Gregg, and nearly 750 members of the H.S.C. student body; who with participation of local clergy developed a program of activities for the day. Proposed activities included faculty speeches, viewing of two anti-war films, a peace march to the downtown Arcata Plaza and involvement in a candlelight vigil in nearby Eureka.(3)

The day began in H.S.C.'s Sequoia Theater, with speeches from students and faculty to a capacity crowd of approximately eight hundred. Student speeches were surprisingly moderate, with only two of the nine student speeches calling for an immediate end of the war and the other seven supporting the moratorium. All the student speakers, however, spoke out against American troop presence in Vietnam and deplored the use of violence in working toward a solution in Vietnam.(4) A film was then shown called "Hanoi, March 13," which showed aspects of daily life for Vietnamese in Hanoi; including pictures of fishermen, women shopping, and images of children playing. These images were intermixed with pictures of fighting and bombing raids as well as photographs of former President and Mrs. Lyndon B. Johnson smiling for the camera.(5)

Following the film, members of the H.S.C. faculty gave speeches relating the war to their various disciplines. One such speaker was Dr. John Hennesy of the History department. Dr. Hennesy had problems with the United State's intervention in Vietnam. He later stated, "I personally was convinced early on that intervention was a mistake, and that its being conducted due to a mindless monolithic communist threat of a big domino take over of Australia and New Zealand was non-sensical in the history of communism itself." Despite these personal views however, Henessey remembered that he and other faculty "tried to keep these things [their speeches at the Moratorium Day] focused in an academic sense, rather than to just get up there and rant and rave about the evils of American intervention in Vietnam." Dr. Hennesey's speech centered on certain text books that were used as high up as the collegiate level which perpetuated stereotypes of Asian peoples and guided American reactions to events in the Far East.(6)

The other faculty speakers included professors from the Biology, Sociology, Geography, and English departments, each in some way relating the war to their field. Don LaBotz of the English department provided the most negative view of the Moratorium, stating that events such as it were much like "myths" due to their having a lack of effects on leaders such as President Richard Nixon; who would continue the war due to other motivations.(7)

The H.S C. Administration's response to these activities was extremely limited. California's State College Chancellor Glenn S. Dumke issued an executive order prohibiting support of the Moratorium, and the H.S.C. administration made it clear that non-compliance with this order could result in disciplinary action. However, the Administration also allowed exceptions to the executive order in areas where involvement in the Moratorium could be related to the nature of a class. College President Cornelius Siemens stated that although the college could not officially support the Moratorium, "each individual should be encouraged to think and act in a way that may lead to an early end to the Vietnam conflict." H.S.C.'s Academic Senate passed a resolution advocating support of the Moratorium day as a day that should be used to study issues related to the war in various ways that individuals felt comfortable with. In a memo to Dr. Alba Gillespie, Chairman of the Academic Senate, President Siemens wrote, "I find myself in full agreement with the general spirit of the Senate's resolution."(8) The Administration was, in effect, not officially supporting the day; therefore complying with the Chancellor's resolution, but simultaneously supporting individual choice in the matter.

Following the faculty and student speeches, a crowd of appromiximately (original) six hundred people gathered at the H.S.C. Library to march down to the Arcata plaza. Walking in the rain the crowd, mostly of students but containing a few faculty, marched peacefully to the Plaza to conduct a Ecumenical service. Along the way they passed three stores which were closed in support of the Moratorium, including Northside Books, the Leather Works Shop, and the Gas Company. A sign in the Gas Company window read: "Please forgive the inconvenience we may have caused you by not being open today. However, we believe it to be our patriotic duty to close our place of business in recognition of the nationwide Moratorium. Vietnam must end now!!!"(9)

Once the marchers reached the Plaza, a service was held consisting of readings from the Bible and from other works by various people; including Martin Luther King Jr. and former President Dwight D. Eisenhower. Folk songs were sung, and the service ended with a prayer of commitment and benediction in which a clergyman told the crowd, "Make sure this doesn't end here today. Let's make sure it goes on."(10)

Opposition to the march and Moratorium was evident. A group of cars drove around the Plaza with their headlights on, continually honking their horns, which made the microphoneless speakers harder to hear!(11) Also, interviews with onlookers revealed various views of the activities. The onlooker reaction varied from an office worker's comment of "I think they're a bunch of earnest young people", to a telephone worker's comment that "I think they're a bunch of treasonous ------ . Do I think they have the right to march? Hell no. They're worse than traitors. They're giving aid and comfort to the enemy." One
downtown Arcata business man stated "We'd all like it to stop. Its our sons who are being killed and our sons and daughters who are out there marching." "But", he continued, "the long hair and the behavior of the young people are hurting their causes: They're destroying their own protest."(12) However, participants in the march seemed pleased. One student commented, "This march has finally confronted people with what's happening, and that's good!(13)

The Moratorium Day march was only part of H.S.C.'s first direct protest to the Vietnam War and yet it was establishing a pattern for H.S.C. protest that would distinguish it from the type of protest occurring on other universities such as U.C. Berkeley. Professor Robert Burroughs of H.S.C.'s English department marched with the students down to the Plaza on Moratorium Day. He had been involved in Vietnam protest marches in Berkeley in 1965 and 1966 and noticed that the difference between Berkeley area protest and H.S.C. protest was extremely evident. He later stated "It was rowdy [at the H.S.C. Moratorium march to the Plaza] but I'd seen violence in Oakland and San Francisco, since I'd been demonstrating against the war since the beginning...I'd watched the Oakland Police turn into a mob and that was really scary...and this[the H.S.C. Moratorium march] was nothing like that."(14)

The difference between the H.S.C. march and a U.C. Berkeley march was quite evident. Instead of meeting blockades of policemen, like U.C. Berkeley marchers did during Vietnam Day Marches in 1965,(15) H.S.C. marchers were led on their march by an Arcata Police car.(16) In its first official day of protest, H.S.C. was already moving away from the example set by the high profile and influential U.C. Berkeley. H.S.C was entering the protest movement, but it was doing it in a much different manner then that at schools such as U.C. Berkeley.

The Moratorium day ended with a large contingent of H.S.C. students taking part in a candlelight vigil procession in nearby Eureka. The procession went in the rain from the Humboldt County Courthouse to the First Presbyterian Church and involved around a thousand people.(17) The vigil was an orderly singing procession and although the march showed no signs of violence it was watched by a large police presence who videotaped participants.(18) The march contained many members of the community including women, children, elderly, and H.S.C. students, all of whom assembled at the First Presbyterian Church for a service lead by various local clergy. The clergy included Reverend James M. Brown, Father James Corley, and H.S.C.'s Catholic Chaplain Father Gary Timmons. The closing prayer offered by Rev. Brown asked for a "commitment to lifelong peace and for prayers for the President and for finding a way to end this war." The service, and Humboldt's first day of involvement in Vietnam war protest, ended with the singing of "We Shall Overcome" as the vigil participants exited the church.(19)

The importance of the Moratorium Day activities seems to have been in setting the tone for future H.S.C. protest against the war. The peaceful Moratorium protest was carried out without violence and with good organization, establishing an important precedent for the year to come. Other developments of the Moratorium, such as President Siemens' liberal response to it, indicated an attitude of H.S.C. administrational acceptance of protest, including protest on campus, as free speech- an attitude that would continue in 1970.

Siemens' lack of major opposition to the expression of political dissent on campus, evident in his support of the Academic Senate's resolution supporting individual choice during the Moratorium Day, alleviated the kind of adversarial relationship that developed between students and administration at schools such as U.C. Berkeley. Instead of creating a Berkeley type atmosphere, in which students would be pitted against the administration for seemingly denying them the right to protest on campus, what developed on H.S.C. was an atmosphere that was tolerant of dissension, therefore lessening the threat of violence. Siemens' liberal response allowed the protesting students to remain focused on national policy, eliminating the possibility and the need for students to turn their energies from protesting the nation's foreign policy to a battle with the school's administration.

Of equal importance to Siemens' response to the protest was the fact that certain faculty were involved with the student organized activities. The faculty involvement helped to lend a legitimacy to the Moratorium at H.S.C.; contributing to its effectiveness and to its non-violent, productive outcome. This relationship between students and certain faculty would remain critical as the turbulent year of 1970 approached.

Moratorium involvement and the arrival of 1970 clearly were ushering in a new era for life on the Humboldt State College campus. There were some in the community surrounding the campus however, who were opposed to the changes that were taking place. An editorial of the Fortuna Beacon expressed this negative view of the way H.S.C. was changing, and attributed the problem to "a hard core of wild eyes at Humboldt, aided and abetted by a coterie of fringe-hanging second rate faculty, plus a few foreign imports looking for the headlines at all times." The editorial continues:

...as long as the name remains, "HUMBOLDT" and not California State of Arcata we would like to take a pride in the college and all it means...let's keep the "kooks" in a minority and hope and pray that the academic level improves along with the status of its muscle...To President Siemens and his loyal administration -let's keep it cool.(20)

Despite this view, wishing for Humboldt State to not change, the way of life on campus was changing. Contained in an editorial of the school's Lumberjack newspaper was a "memorial" written for the type of student who used to typify Humboldt State, named "Joe College". The editorial expressed the ways in which life for students at H.S.C. was changing. The older H.S.C. student represented by "Joe", "was no wavemaker." "He was content to float along with the current of college life, avoiding the swirl of controversy, the responsibility of involvement, the disappointment of self-realization." The editorial continues, "Now that Joe has gone, a new generation has come to take his place. Like all new generations, they came in with a roar, caused some excitement, made some mistakes, learned some lessons. Now, they will have to grow up. Their causes are just, their era is beginning. Rest in Peace Joe."(21)

No matter how one felt about the change taking place on campus its existence could not be denied. Like students on other campuses, H.S.C. students were awakening politically and becoming more active. Also, like many other campuses, certain segments of the community surrounding this new type of campus resented this increase in student protest and activism. Unlike many other campuses however, officials and students at H.S.C. realized this growing tension and began to attempt to remedy these developments in a constructive manner and to prepare for the new college atmosphere to come in 1970. Preparations were made on H.S.C. for a unique type of a retreat that would collect together students, faculty, administration and community.

The aim of the proposed retreat, as envisioned by creator Dr. Ed Simmons, Dean of Student Activities, was to get the various groups of the campus community together to avoid what he and others saw as developing schisms. He stated, "It is becoming increasingly evident that these schisms are widening at an accelerating rate. Unless we act, we will find ourselves with a truly splintered community unable to function."(22)

In the creation of this unique retreat H.S.C. was again setting out on a course quite different from that experienced on other campuses. At U.C. Berkeley for example, administrators responded to increased student activism by attempting to repress student speech on campus. This approach led only to even more student activism and the tensions and conflict of the Free Speech Movement. In contrast, at H.S.C., Simmons and other H.S.C. administrators accepted the emergence of increased student activism and attempted to deal productively with this new type of campus atmosphere. The approach chosen to connect the changing campus and the surrounding community became known as the Smith River Retreat.

The main discussion at the three day retreat, to be held at the Ship Ashore Lodge near the Smith River in January 1970, was the subject, "What would you like our college community to be like in four years?" A professional mediator from U.C.L.A., Dr. David Peters, was hired to moderate, Arcata City Manager George Wood, Police Chief N.J. Gibson, and other prominent community members were invited to attend. Leading the contingent of over forty students, twelve administrators, and fifteen faculty members, were President Siemens, Dr. Simmons, Faculty President Kathryn Corbett and Associated Student Body President Waine Benedict. The Arcata City government provided one hundred dollars for its expenses at the retreat, and several H.S.C. grants were used to pay for campus member involvement.(23)

One of the specific achievements that came from the retreat was the beginning of a "cluster program", which created a sixteen unit, three semester long, jointly taught course which would fulfill a students lower division general education requirement.(24) More important than specific results however, was the retreat's effect in facilitating communication between all segments of the campus community. The mere fact that the prominent leaders of all the varying groups on campus gathered and talked for a weekend had a cohesive effect that helped prepare H.S.C. for 1970.

Ms. Kathryn Corbett, H.S.C. Faculty President at the time of the Smith River Retreat and retreat participant later remembered, "What that [the Smith River Retreat] did was to establish communication that was just incredible for the total campus...and you had a situation of intense communication which existed at the campus level after Smith River, and that influenced things when we entered the crucial year of 1970."(25) campuses such as U.C. Berkeley where communication between students, administration, and the surrounding community was nearly non-existent and sometimes hostile, at H.S.C., when future challenges would arise in relations between segments of the campus and the community, the communication created at the Smith River Retreat would help to ease tensions.

The communication established at Smith River was desperately needed as national events in 1970 once again had reverberations on the H.S.C. campus. On April 30, 1970, President Nixon announced to the American people that American forces had acted in an "incursion" in Cambodia. In response campus protest all across the nation once again surged. Four days later four students were killed at Kent State University in Ohio and campuses exploded in unparalleled levels of protest.(26) Humboldt State College was not immune to this upsurge in protest; in fact, outrage over both Cambodia and the shootings at Kent State elevated protest to a level previously unknown at H.S.C.

On Tuesday, May 5, 1970, H.S.C.'s Student Legislative Council held a meeting attended by an estimated crowd of 1,100 students. The meeting turned into a debate over a resolution created by student representative Steve Kilkenny which asked for a "voluntary, non-violent boycott of classes" as a response to both the Kent State killings and U.S. entry into Cambodia. Eventually, a straw poll was held and the S.L.C. passed a modified version of Kilkenny's resolution by a vote of 13-1. It stated: "BE IT RESOLVED: that to demonstrate our commitment against violence and the war, we support, and urge the entire college community to participate in a voluntary, non-violent boycott of all student activities." Other portions of the resolution called for ringing the Founders Hall peace bell ever five minutes during the duration of the boycott, flying the flag of the United States over the H.S.C. campus upside down until the war's end, and a call for a massive meeting of the entire campus community at Sequoia Plaza at noon on the next day.(27)

H.S.C.'s Faculty Executive board was also in meeting on May 5, 1970, and it decided to dismiss classes by noon the next day so that students could attend the meeting on the Sequoia Plaza; this decision was approved by President Siemens. General Faculty President Kathryn Corbett stated that the purpose of the rally would be large debate on what to do with the S.L.C. resolutions and what the campus response should be to the Kent State shootings and the Cambodian intervention. The attempt of the rally would be to "find consensus for campus action."(28)

Wednesday, May 6, 1970, began with California Governor Ronald Reagan asking all University of California and California State Colleges to shut down from Thursday, May 7, until the end of the coming weekend. Reagan stated that, "I hope that this period will allow time for national reflection away from the emotional turmoil and encourage all to disavow violence and mob action."(29) In responding to this, President Siemens issued a memoranda distributed all over H.S.C., closing the campus from Thursday, May 7, through Saturday, May 9. The memorandum however, did include permission for college activities for Wednesday, May 6, to continue;(30) allowing the officially sponsored rally at noon to take place.

The rally that took place on Wednesday May 6, was attended by over 3,000 people, including both students and faculty. It was moderated by General Faculty President Kathryn Corbett and new Student Body President Bill Richardson. For the duration of the four hour meeting the main microphone never left the hands of either Corbett or Richardson. However, anyone who wanted to speak was able to come up to the platform and speak for two to three minutes. A diverse group of students lined up to speak, including one U.S. Marine in full dress uniform!(31) Eventually the S.L.C. resolution was voted on and ninety percent of the crowd approved the motion for a voluntary, peaceful, one week strike to begin on Monday, May 11th. Other resolutions passed calling for the flying of the U.S. flag followed by a black flag and a peace flag for the duration of the war, and for the creation of a delegation that would be sent from H.S.C. to Washington D.C. to
meet with government legislators to inform them of H.S.C. views on the war. This delegation was to include President Siemens.(32)