Interview with Jack B. Hall, December 9, 1980

 M. HALL: Jack B. Hall by Mitchell Hall - Maureen Saxon--interview with Jack B. Hall, vice president of the medical center at the University of Kentucky. Dealing with the campus disturbances at U.K. in 1970. The date is December 9, 1980 and the interviewer is Mitchell Hall.

[Pause in recording.]

M. HALL: Okay, Mr. Hall. At the time, as dean of students, I'm sure you remember the time of April and May of 1970 when, uh, campuses across the country were demonstrating for one cause or another. Uh, generally over issues that were related to the Vietnam war, America's, uh, involvement there. As you recall, what was the mood of the campus here at the University of Kentucky at that time?

J. HALL: Well, I think in the beginning, in April, uh, in the beginning of April, it was, uh, I guess beginning to move a little bit toward a sensitive 00:01:00campus in the sense of national issues. Uh, I think in mid-April, and I don't remember the specific date, but I think probably around the time that the President Nixon began to take a position in relation to Cambodia, uh, the mood became much more, uh, one of, of speaking out, at least. And then I think as certain actions occurred, uh, in particular, uh, I want to say actions, they could be actions or reactions depending upon how you're looking at it.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: But, uh, in particular in relation to other campuses and, and demonstrations, the Washington scene and demonstrations there, I think that it left the, the vocal stage and became a stage of action and reaction.

M. HALL: So, you, you noticed a, a definite change after Nixon announced the Cambodian invasion and, and the deaths that followed at Kent State on May 4?

J. HALL: Well, you know, I wouldn't want to, want to say that that specific activity, there are other things, and, and I think they probably relate more to an individual campus and the kind of, uh, impetus that was given to a, to an individual campus as a result of its own activities. In our case here, the, uh, the, uh, visit by, uh, a fellow by the name of Kunstler, uh, I think, certainly added to that. As I recall, that did follow Nixon's speech. But, you know, I can't pinpoint it, but I think it was a trend through that period of time as the, uh, as one looks back on it from a historical perspective, as, as those things that occurred in relation to, uh, the Cambodian situation and the Vietnam 00:03:00situation. Uh, as they became more proclaimed in the newspaper, people began to take more solid positions.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: And, uh, you know, I think the media, uh, not just in relation to Nixon's speech, but in relation to other kinds of speeches, that's, because that was a national situation. I happened to remember it. Um, I think the focus became, uh, more critical. The more focused the media gave to it, the more attention it drew externally.

M. HALL: Um-hm. What was the relationship at the time between the university administration and the students?

J. HALL: Well, of course, I think students for a period of maybe beg-, beginning 00:04:00back in, uh, late '66, uh, or the school year of late '66 to '67 were becoming more, uh, much more active in the sense of student rights and due process. And, uh, there were on, on many campuses across the nation, and, uh, ours was only differ-, different in that we probably had less to contend with in the sense of student activity. Uh, most all campuses had some kind of confrontation in relation to, uh, student activity. Uh, not necessarily in relation to, uh, activist groups, but also in relation to student rights, student due process, 00:05:00uh, freedoms of the campus newspaper, uh, all of those, those kinds of things were beginning to be, uh, more focal points throughout the period, and, uh, and continued even beyond the '70, as far as that goes.

M. HALL: Um-hm. Were you ever faced, um, by student activists on one issue or another, uh, where they would present a list of demands or anything of this nature? And if so, how did you deal with that particular, uh, type of situation?

J. HALL: I don't know that I ever, you know, received a "list of demands." Uh, as I recall, throughout the, you know, those years students were continually demanding something. Uh, more in particular, it related to, to those things 00:06:00that they, they felt that they were entitled to have as students that had been taken away from them, uh, in the sense that if they weren't students, they would have. Uh, the, concept of in loco parentis, uh, you know, the parent away from home, you know, they, they wanted that done away with. Uh, they felt, you know, that if they had moved out in town and were not a student at U.K., they could do as they, uh, pleased. And nobody could tell them what to do, and they felt that's the way it ought to be on the campus. So, there were continually those kinds of, of, uh, demands presented in one form or another. You know, sometimes in written form, sometimes in, uh, in a, in a person-to-person confrontation with student leadership. Uh, but I don't recall specifically anybody saying, 00:07:00you know, giving me a piece of paper, and here say, "Here's twenty things we want."

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: But it was continuum. Uh, you know, more, more freedom. Uh, if I had to put it one word, that's what they felt. That they wanted more freedom to exercise their rights.

M. HALL: Okay. What type of activities occurred on the campus after, uh, the announcement of President Nixon that troops were going into Cambodia? Uh, exactly what type of activities, uh, occurred that week or the following week?

J. HALL: Oh, Lordie. In the sense of, of, of, uh, of my ability to remember, there were several, uh, demonstrations scheduled. Some of them, uh, drew a 00:08:00crowd and some didn't. Some may have been, been as small as five people demonstrating in front of the ROTC building. Uh, others grew to several thousand, uh, through the period of, uh, that time up through, uh, the, uh, day of May 8 or 9, somewhere thereabouts, the end of school. (coughs) Excuse me. The, uh, you know, there were other kinds of things that occurred that that I guess there was an assumption that related to student, uh, activism. Uh, the incident of fires on the campus increased considerably. Uh, we had three or four fires that, uh, we could not account for in the sense of, uh, of what caused them. Uh, and they occurred over such a short period of time, uh, under 00:09:00unusual circumstances. So, there was that kind of activity. There was a covert activity and an overt activity. Uh, and, and I say, you know, uh, it's an assumption, uh, that there was some relationship between, uh, the current things of the day in the sense of student activism and those fires. Uh, history would tend to bear that out because there wasn't that pattern of occurrence before nor has there been since.

M. HALL: All right. Just mentioning the fires, do you recall where they occurred other than the old wooden ROTC building?

J. HALL: Oh yeah, there was, uh, the commerce building had a fire, curtains and drapes were burnt in that building. The, uh, Reynolds warehouse had a fire in it. Uh, there were several others that I don't, don't recall specifically. Uh, 00:10:00education building, waste cans, and things of that nature were set on fire. But two, the two major ones, I think, was the stage area in the commerce building and, uh, an area in the Reynolds storage building which was over on Broadway, an older building. It happened to have, have the good fortune of having a sprinkler system in it. And, uh, as a result, uh, there was not much fire but a lot of damage but, but mainly because of water.

M. HALL: Um-hm. There were reports in the newspapers that, uh, there was a rally at the Student Center on May 5, which was a Tuesday, and that you and a couple of other people tried to or attempted to disperse the rally for one reason or other. Do you recall what the reasoning behind that was?

J. HALL: Well, there were, during the period of, of May 1 to May 8, there were numerous rallies, some of which we tried to disperse and some of which we 00:11:00didn't. Uh, normally the criteria for trying to disperse a group was, was to, to try to determine whether or not the group would create a violent kind of setting or a destructive kind of setting.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: And, uh, you refer to the date of May?

M. HALL: May 5.

J. HALL: Fifth, a Tuesday. At what time?

M. HALL: Uh, I don't believe there was a time given. It was just during the afternoon--

J. HALL: --okay, that Tuesday happened to also be the Tuesday of the board of trustees meeting. So, it was a rather heavy day, all day. Uh, and the students were quite unhappy, uh, because the board had not taken action on a resolution that they had passed as a student government group and had given to the president of student government who, uh, sat as a member of the board of trustees and who presented it to the board. And that evening was the, was the 00:12:00evening of the fire, uh, of, of Buell Armory. And--[buzzer sounds]--as I recall--can we stop that? As I recall--

[Pause in recording.]

J. HALL: As, as I recall, the particular incident, uh, at hand there, uh, if it were in the evening, and I do recall, uh, on several occasions that evening, um, trying to break up, uh, quite a large gathering, I'd say a thousand plus. Uh, and, and really ordering a dispersal of it, uh, at a point in time because they were throwing rocks, and breaking out windows, and, uh, things of that nature. As it turned out, the group dispersed itself at the onset of the fire in, in, uh, the old ROTC, uh, building.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: I'm trying to think of the name of it. I can't recall the name of it.

M. HALL: Was there ever anyone convicted of starting the fire?

J. HALL: Not that I'm aware of.

M. HALL: Okay. Now, the following day, May 6, President Singletary imposed a five o'clock curfew for campus. Do you recall the purpose of that curfew?

J. HALL: I think it was, you know, it was in an effort to try to, to hold down mass activities on the campus. Uh, small group activities didn't seem to be a problem, but as large groups of students gathered together and were encouraged by, uh, the rhetoric of quite activist speeches, uh, then it appeared that the, the large numbers provided the cover for individuals, uh, to, uh, invoke damages 00:14:00in the way of rocks--

M. HALL: --um-hm--

J. HALL: --and paint and just, just general destruction. So, I think the effort was to, was to reduce the activity and ability for large crowds to gather.

M. HALL: Was there, uh, any indication that individuals had come in from off campus to stir up trouble?

J. HALL: Oh yeah.

M. HALL: All right. Do you know of any, um, any proof to substantiate this or reports that you received?

J. HALL: Well--(laughs)--yeah. Uh, to this, to, to this extent, that question was asked to me in a federal court proceeding, and I provided the court with a list of people who were active, uh, during the demonstrations but who were not students here.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: And I, at this point in time, I do not recall any of the names. But, 00:15:00but it would be a, a part of the federal court record.

M. HALL: Okay. Uh, that same day, May 6, a Wednesday, after President Singletary's five o'clock curfew passed with little evident effect, Governor Nunn then imposed a seven o'clock curfew for that same evening. Uh, was the governor called in by the administration to, to help in keeping order on campus?

J. HALL: You'd have to ask that question of the president. I'm, I'm not aware that he called or that he didn't call.

M. HALL: Um-hm. Okay. Do you know who was responsible then for bringing the National Guard on campus?

J. HALL: Oh, the governor was.

M. HALL: Okay. And again--

J. HALL: --by executive order.

M. HALL: Okay. So, you're not aware then if he was asked to do this or if he did it on his own?

J. HALL: I'm, I'm not aware of, of who he had conversations with in relation to, 00:16:00uh, to the activation of the National Guard. Uh, I can only say that he didn't ask me.

M. HALL: Um-hm. Okay. In your own opinion, was, was it necessary for the National Guard to be brought on campus to, to maintain order at that time?

J. HALL: I think it was a, a, uh, a proper move under the circumstances, having previously, the day before, lost a building for whatever reasons. And again, I, in my mind, I go back and say there were numerous kinds of fires, uh, that were occurring that was not a normal pattern for this campus. I can only attribute that, uh, to, uh, the activist kind of things that were happening in relation to students.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: I cannot, I cannot prove that point.

M. HALL: Yeah.

J. HALL: Uh, I'm not saying that I, you know, I would've agreed with totally with the manner in which the implementation was made or the controls were set. 00:17:00Uh, I did have, in relation to both the state police and the guard, certain input once they were here in relation to their handling of students. Uh, but I think just from a security standpoint, from a standpoint of the protection of the physical properties of this institution, it was a, it was a proper move.

M. HALL: All right. The student government president at the time, Steve Bright, has blamed the extra police forces for provoking violence. How would you respond to that particular statement?

J. HALL: Well, I would respond by saying that, you know, anybody can make a guess as to what provoked violence. Um, I personally feel that we did not have any violence after they were here.

M. HALL: Okay. Was there any pressure from state officials that you're aware of on university officials to handle the situation in a particular manner?

J. HALL: Well, no. I think, you know, any, any pressure I felt on me was, I guess, placed there by myself and my love for this institution. And my feeling that there ought to be a manner in which the students can express their thoughts and their feelings peacefully. And yet at the same time, not, not create a disturbance or destruction to the campus. And that's what I worked toward.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: Is the ability to do both. And quickly when the curfews were lifted and when the, uh, state police and the National Guard left the campus, we immediately returned to the ability for, uh, students to, to, uh, assemble 00:19:00together, and to, uh, you know, uh, carry forth whatever kinds of, uh, freedoms of speech activity they wanted to, as long, again, as they were peaceful.

M. HALL: Um-hm. What then was the reaction of the administration to these confrontations? Were there any long-term implications in them? Was there a change in the relationship of the administration and the students?

J. HALL: Well, I think for a period of, of maybe another year or two, uh, with some of the students who were, uh, some of the extreme activists who were involved that, uh, the ability to communicate with them was lost. Uh, I don't think in the sense of, of the, uh, normal--I won't say normal; that might imply 00:20:00those others weren't normal--the average student, uh, who was neither to the extreme right or to the extreme left, uh, I don't think it affected it at all. At the beginning of the next, it was, it was resolved by the beginning of the following school year.

M. HALL: Um-hm. All right, there were people who asked that the university be closed down because of the disruptions. Uh, this was not done, but commencement exercises were cancelled. Do you recall why this was done?

J. HALL: The university is, was within a few days of completing of the semester. Uh, I think the counsel of all the people involved was that there wasn't a 00:21:00situation on the campus where there was threat to the lives of students. Uh, and that they could continue to pursue their educational goals and could complete the semester. I think the threat--and this, this is the point that is in my mind is continually missed even today, uh, by much of the media and many of the students involved in, in roles of leadership--the, the constraints that the university placed were to protect people, not to hurt them. And both in, in the sense of, of the manpower of, of my staff, the dean of student staff, the residence hall staff, the, uh, the campus police, the state police, the National Guard, uh, those people were, were instructed very carefully that they were not 00:22:00to harm students. In fact, they were here to make the campus peaceful so the educational pursuits could take place. Now, a lot of people, and especially the activists involved, saw those people being here as limiting their freedoms. And to the extent of nighttime activities on this campus, that is true. The ability for those students to gather in large numbers, uh, to throw rocks, carry torches, uh, to build fires, to do(??) those sorts of things, yes, it was a limitation. It was an intended limitation. But the student who wanted to study, uh, who wanted to, uh, be involved in the academic setting, who wanted to go to class during the daytime, they didn't bother those people at all. They 00:23:00were here. They were here to protect property and to protect lives. So, it's a question of interpretation, and I happen to interpret it that the things that we did was to enhance, under the worst of circumstances, the ability to finish the semester and to protect the property of, of the state of Kentucky.

M. HALL: Um-hm. You mentioned, uh, possible physical harm. Were there any substantiated cases of, of, um, injury to either police or National Guard forces on campus or students?

J. HALL: Now, there were, there were several minor confrontations, uh, in relation to, to a few arr-, arrest, uh, where, and I'd don't, you know, I'd be guessing, but I'd say no more than a half-a-dozen students may have received a 00:24:00blow from a billy stick. Uh, I can recall one in particular which is somewhat humorous. Uh, I was at the armory when an arrest had been made and that's where they brought them to book them. And, and I interviewed or somebody on my staff interviewed every staff-, every student who was arrested, to ask that very question: whether or not they had been abused. And, uh, this one young lady said she had been hit several times with a billy stick. And I could see no marks on her whatsoever, whereupon she turned around and lifted her dress, and she had three or four good whops across her butt. So, there's, there was, and again to me, that again implies that, that there wasn't an effort to, to split heads, to really hurt people, but I, I think the thing, to answer your question in a different way, the burning of the building adjacent to Blazer Hall had the potential to really be destructive in the sense of lives. And that's the kind 00:25:00of thing that I think the governor's judgment was made on; is the ability to, or the, his attempt to protect property against the threat of that nature, a firebombing or something of that nature.

M. HALL: So, there was, or at, at least some people in the, in the state or university administration had reason to believe that, that the burning of that particular building had been done by a student or student-related individual or group?

J. HALL: Let me say this: whether it was by a student or a student-related individual or a group, the scene, the activity, the occurrences on this campus either from within those that were participating or from without, somebody who may be sympathizing with that feeling, in my mind without question caused the 00:26:00burning of that building. You know, I have no earthly idea whether it was a student, a faculty member, a minister, an administrator, somebody from Chicago, or somebody from Europe. You know, I have no, not even a good guess.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: Except in my mind, I, I feel confident that the setting that, that had, that had occurred over a period of time, and who, which accumulated a, a, which had come to, to focus at that particular time, encouraged somebody to react in that manner.

M. HALL: Uh, the American Association of University Professors, uh, presented a petition to the university administration to remove the police forces from campus. How did the administration react to that?

J. HALL: Well, I think, you know, I don't know what date that occurred. It seems like that was on something like the, the sixth or seventh--

M. HALL: --it was after the burning--

J. HALL: --they were--yeah, they were removed shortly after that. I think, I think there was a continual evaluation on the part of the university as well as the governor and his staff. And I did on several occasions communicate with, uh, a member of the governor's staff. And it wasn't, as I said, daily and, and hourly, and, uh, contact with his representatives in the sense of leadership of the guard and the state police on the campus. There was continual evaluation, as to, as to when and how quickly could we remove the guard from the campus. We were all anxious to, to remove it. They were anxious to leave. Uh, whether you 00:28:00realize it or not, some of those, some of those people who were in the guard were also students here.

M. HALL: All right. There's also a recommendation by the U.K. Faculty Senate that the school be closed, and we've already mentioned that the school was not closed. That, do you recall how the administration responded to the faculty senate recommendation?

J. HALL: Uh, I think I probably answered that question in the sense that, that I think it was a question of evaluating whether, whether or not the presence of the various police forces and the guard would make the campus safe enough to operate in the daytime. And, uh, you know, at what point would those forces no longer be needed. And you could move them off. And, and I think the calls were 00:29:00close in their, their judgment call, and it's a question of, uh, you know, a fellow who, who sits in the chair over there as president has, has the final decision and the fellow who sits in the chair as governor.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: And, uh, you know, those two people, with the help of their staffs and with the board of trustees, I think evaluated every request. Uh, in fact, it probably was not even necessary to get those requests. They were continually evaluating it anyway.

M. HALL: What actions then were taken against the students that had been arrested?

J. HALL: You would have to check the court records to, to find out exactly what happened. Uh, I think they ranged in fines from ten dollars to I think one student received six months in jail, but I think that was eventually probated 00:30:00for or put him on probation for a year.

M. HALL: Were they actually prosecuted by the university, or?

J. HALL: No.

M. HALL: Okay.

J. HALL: No. Let me, let me clarify that, too. Uh, in the process, and you referred earlier to, uh, to my, uh, requesting students to disperse. In, in the process of dealing both under the university code and under state law, you have to determine that a crowd has reached the point at which it is no longer an orderly group. And each time we made that determination, I made an announcement requesting for them to disperse. At that point when they didn't, or if they 00:31:00didn't, in some cases they did--very early in some cases they did and very late in some cases they did--but there were times when they didn't. At that point in time, my direction was to then turn it over to a proper police agency, whether it be the campus police, the state police, uh, or the city police. Then it becomes a, a, a police matter, a, a statutory-, uh, uh, governed situation. And so, at that point they were no longer in violation of the student code, which would be a university disciplinary action, but they were involved with, with the violation of, of state law, which then became something that whichever police agency was involved then prosecuted, not us.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: We were sometimes called as witnesses. Both for and against.

M. HALL: What do you feel then were them the important results of this week, week and a half of demonstrations or confrontation here at the university?

J. HALL: I'm not sure that there were any, any real important results.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: Uh, I think it's a, it's a sad commentary when individuals can ban themselves together and reach an emotional situation, emotional state whereby, in my mind, they really loose contact with the reality of the situation of those 00:33:00freedoms they have. And they force the situation, uh, to a point where then you must take action in a police sense to restore order. And I don't know what good there is in that. I don't know what, you know, what learning process there is in that. Uh, we all believe in the freedoms of assembly, of speech, of those sorts of things. And, and I think it's been demonstrated in the history of this institution, and, uh, during the period that I was dean of, dean of students, we made every effort to provide places for students to assemble, to speak, uh, to, uh, enjoy those kinds of freedoms. And never once, uh, to my memory, until such 00:34:00time as it became disorderly, disruptive, or violent, did we take any action. And so, I don't know you know when you go through that process. And it occurs from time to time in other settings. Students are not the only group that, you know, can be involved in that. Uh, striking groups have this problem continually. And, uh, it's probably an easier one to deal with in the sense of, of, uh, you know, standing off and observing it rather than being involved in it. But the courts are, you know, they set up explicit standards of, of how they may picket, and under what conditions they may picket, and that they should be peaceful. And yet occasionally somebody gets shot, and occasionally there's a confrontation between, uh, a union and nonunion, or union and management, or, 00:35:00or police and, and, uh, pickets. And, you know, what is, what is there good out of that?

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: You know, probably for the individuals involved maybe they learn a little more about what that thin line is. But, but I'm not really sure there's a whole lot of good that comes out of it.

M. HALL: Were you able or were there attempts made to monitor activities of particular groups or individuals during that time period?

J. HALL: Yeah, any group that was, that assembled on campus, uh, it was our standard procedure at the time to have staff members present, uh, to try to anticipate the question of, of disruption, violence. Uh, there was no covert, 00:36:00uh, efforts to infiltrate, or to follow, or to do anything of that nature.

M. HALL: Are there any comments that you would like to make, um, of your own that I may not have touched on that deals with the subject?

J. HALL: Well, I guess one looks back, and as, as best he can and tries to recall the circumstances, and, uh, you know, wonders, wonders whether or not anything could've been done differently, uh, to have made the circumstances turn out differently. Uh, I don't, I don't know that that you can when you're under 00:37:00that kind of pressure. Uh, and pressure in the sense of not, not anything except the time element and the numbers involved and the quickness of it is the kind of pressure I'm referring to. Uh, the, the biggest solution to, to the kinds of things that were, were active at that time is communication; the opportunity to sit down and discuss, to, to feel you have some input. Uh, and there, there never was, never seemed to be that kind of time available. Once, once it focused. And, uh, so, you know, I guess, that, that, that that's the kind of thing that, that I have searched from time to time and maybe a lot more, you know, immediately thereafter, to try to search out in my own mind if there 00:38:00were focal points prior to, uh, the really disturbance on the campus. That there might've been more interaction with certain activist groups on the campus. Uh, I can't recall. Uh, there must've been a half-a-dozen or dozen-mobilization group and the SDS. And, and that's just two names that come to mind right off, but I'm, but there were many others.

M. HALL: Um-hm.

J. HALL: And whether or not that the university could've possibly had more interaction as an administration, as a dean of students group, and, and maybe, uh, uh, at least stalled some of the things that, that occurred, if not prevented them.

M. HALL: Okay.

J. HALL: But, but really, it was a, it was a very emotional time. And, uh, the 00:39:00only way you could really judge this, or the real way you could judge it, is that people outside of the university community could not really realize what was occurring on this campus, and what, what the emotion and the feeling of the students were on this campus. They had no sense, uh, and no ability to, to feel that. And I guess that led even to an enforcement of it because the press, uh, in the way they portrayed it, made many, many of the, of the supporters of this institution very reactive to the students, very negative about them. Uh, and 00:40:00I'm sure those kinds of inputs occurred probably more so at the level of the governor than they did at the level of the president or at my, my level. And I'm, I'm, I'm certain that people felt like the guard ought to go in and take over the campus. They ought to close the campus. We ought to send the students home. Uh, you know, they don't deserve an education. And yet, even though there were large numbers at times, the students were very emotionally involved in this, this was still, uh, probably even in the masses no more than 10 percent of the population of the campus, of the student population. Uh, 5 percent of the total population. The real activist group was probably less than half of a percent.

M. HALL: Okay. Anything else?

J. HALL: No.

M. HALL: Okay, Mr. Hall.

[End of interview.]