Nation: CHICAGO EXAMINED: ANATOMY OF A POLICE RIOT'

IN Chicago, during the Democratic National Convention last August, two American rights collided headon: the acknowledged right to dissent within certain limits, and the equally valid right of a city to protect its citizens and its property. But what limits? And what kind of protection? Americans and the rest of the world were at first appalled by the way the police did battle with the demonstrators. But, almost immediately, pollsters reported that a majority of Americans believed that, given the provocation and the tense situation they encountered, Chicago's police had struck a notable blow for law and order. Months after the event, the conflict remains significant and symbolic of the deep divisions, the warring judgments in American society.

In Washington this week, a thick, well-documented report titled Rights in Conflict was issued by a Chicago study team under the direction of Daniel Walker, vice president and general counsel of Montgomery Ward. He had been assigned by the President's Commission on the Causes and Prevention of Violence, headed by Milton Eisenhower, to determine what happened in Chicago and why and how. In preparing the report over a period of 53 days, Walker and his staff of 212 relied largely on 3,437 statements from eyewitnesses and participants, some obtained by staffers, others taken by the FBI and such agencies as the U.S. Attorney's office in Chicago. The staff also viewed some 180 hours of relevant film taken by television networks, local TV stations, police and citizens.

The staff interviewers encountered some eloquence and much searing memory. During most of the traumatic week of the convention, a Los Angeles police inspector who was present as an observer thought that "the restraint of the police, both as individual members and as an organization, was beyond reason." But of the Wednesday night battle in front of the Conrad Hilton Hotel, the same official said: "There is no question but that many officers acted without restraint and exerted force beyond that necessary under the circumstances." As his policemen went out of control that night, the deputy superintendent in charge had to pull berserk officers off battered and bruised demonstrators, shouting at them: "Stop, damn it, stop! For Christ's sake, stop it!" The report confirms the earlier impression that the Chicago police force—in Mayor Daley's celebrated euphemism—"overreacted." But it also stresses the provocations they suffered and records some examples of police restraint.

The report also places the start of the confrontation considerably earlier than the convention week—there had been riots in Chicago's black ghettos in 1966 and again in April 1968, after the murder of Martin Luther King. Mayor Daley's own riot-study committee (Daniel Walker was No. 2 man) cited the restraint practiced by the police as a major factor in keeping the April riots from becoming even "more violent and widespread." But after April 1968, Daley criticized his police for their restraint and urged them to shoot to kill arsonists and maim looters. Says the report: "The effect on the police became apparent several weeks later when they attacked demonstrators, bystanders and media representatives at a civic-center peace march."