¹ Lane, Roger, ‘Urban police and crime in nineteenth-century America’, in Crime and justice: an annual review of research, vol. 2, ed. Morris, N. and Tonry, M. (Chicago, 1980)Google Scholar; Lane, Roger, Violent death in the city: suicide, accident, and murder in nineteenth-century Philadelphia (Cambridge, Mass., 1979)Google Scholar; Richardson, James F., The New York police, colonial times to 1901 (New York, 1970)Google Scholar; Monkkonen, E. H., ‘A disorderly people? urban order in nineteenth and twentieth centuries’, Journal of American History, LXVIII (12 1981), 536–59Google Scholar.

² Platt, T. et al. , The iron fist and the velvet glove (Berkeley, 1982)Google Scholar; Parks, E., ‘From constabulary to police society’, Catalyst, V (1970), 76–96Google Scholar; Harring, S. L., ‘Class conflict and the suppression of tramps in Buffalo, 1892–1894’, Law and Society Review no. 11 (1977), 873–911Google Scholar.

³ Catton, Bruce, Mr Lincoln's army (Garden City, N.Y., 1962), p. 122Google Scholar. See also, pp. 119–23, 129.

⁴ Pinkerton, Allan, Tests on passenger conductors made by the national police agency (Chicago, 1870)Google Scholar.

⁵ Ware, Norman J., The labor movement in the United States: 1860–1895 (New York, 1964), p. 9Google Scholar.

⁶ U.S. congress, senate committee on labor and education, ‘Investigation in relation to the employment for private purposes of armed bodies of men, or detectives, in connection with differences between workmen and employers’, Senate report 1280, 52d congress, 2nd sess. (Washington, D.C., 1893), pp. 61–2Google Scholar.

⁷ Pinkerton, Allan, Strikers, communists, tramps and detectives (New York, 1878)Google Scholar.

⁸ For instance, nearly 100,000 workers in the New York building and mechanical trades participated in a strike in 1872 for the eight-hour day. Brecher, Strike!, p. 70.

⁹ This incident has been well-covered by labour historians, including Bimba, A., The Mollie Maguires (New York, 1931)Google Scholar; Broehl, The Mollie Maguires; Boyer, R. O. and Morais, H., Labor's untold story (New York, 1971)Google Scholar; and Aurand, H. W., From the Mollie Maguires to the united mine workers (Philadelphia, 1971)Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Pinkerton, Allan to Bangs, George, 15 08, 1872, Allan Pinkerton letter books, 1872–1875Google Scholar, in Pinkerton MSS, Library of Congress; Pinkerton, Allan to Pinkerton, Robert, 26 05 1875, Letter booksGoogle Scholar.

¹¹ The trial of 1855 of Oscar Caldwell, one of the rail conductors nabbed by the Pinkertons, drew considerable publicity. Considered a ‘test case’ by the rail companies, this was also one of the nation's first embezzlement trials (in fact, there was as yet no such legal statute). Numerous fellow conductors and railworkers came to Caldwell's defence with attorney's fees and moral support. See Morn, , The eye that never sleeps, pp. 17–18Google Scholar. Did fellow workers not define Caldwell's actions as criminal, but rather as wage-in-kind?

¹² Schlegel, Marvin W., ‘The workingmen's benevolent association: first union of anthracite miners’, Pennsylvania History, X, 4 (10 1943), 245Google Scholar.

¹³ Bimba, , The Mollie Maguires, p. 24Google Scholar.

¹⁴ Pinkerton, Allan, The Mollie Maguires and the detectives (London, 1877), p. 15Google Scholar.

¹⁵ Schlcgel, Marvin W., ‘America's first cartel’, Pennsylvania History, XIII, 1 (01 1946), 5, 1–16Google Scholar.

¹⁶ James McParlan to Allan Pinkerton, 10 Oct. 1873, vol. II, binder 14, Pinkerton national detective agency papers, Pinkerton's, Inc. archives, New York City; Pinkerton, Allan, The Mollie Maguires and the detectives, pp. 22–3Google Scholar.

¹⁷ For a discussion of the origin and employment of Pennsylvania's Coal and Iron police commissions, see Shalloo, J. D., Private police, with special reference to Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, 1933), pp. 58–134Google Scholar.

¹⁸ Aurand, H. W., From the Mollie Maguires to the united mine workers (Philadelphia, 1971), p. 25Google Scholar.

¹⁹ Shalloo, , Private police, p. 59Google Scholar.

²⁰ Horan, , The Pinkertons, p. 339Google Scholar.

²¹ ‘The employment of Pinkerton detectives’, House report no. 2447, 52nd congress, 2nd. session (Washington, D.C., 1893), pp. 56–7Google Scholar.

²² Quoted in Horan, , The Pinkertons, p. 355Google Scholar.

²³ House report no. 2447; senate report no. 1280; see also Hogg, B.J., ‘Public reaction to Pinkertonism and the labor question’, Pennsylvania History, XI (07 1944), 171–99Google Scholar.

²⁴ Journal of the knights of labor, 14 July, 1892.

²⁵ Senate report no. 1280, 1893: xv.

²⁶ Senate report no. 1280, 1893: xv, for a summary of these congressional investigations.

²⁷ ‘The States have undoubted authority to legislate against the employment of armed bodies of men for private purposes, as many of them are doing. As to the power of Congress to legislate, this is not so clear, though it would seem that Congress ought not to be powerless to prevent the movement of bodies of private citizens from one State to another for the purpose of taking part, with arms in hands, in the settlement of disputes between employers and their workmen’ (Senate report no. 1280: xv).

²⁸ House report no. 2447, 1893: xxviii, lxviii.

²⁹ U.S. senate, committee on education and labor, ‘Strike-breaking services’. Report no. 6, part I. 76th congress, Ist session (Washington, D.C., 1939), p. 13.

³⁰ For a summary of these laws, see 29 above, appendix B, pp. 149–50. Also, see ‘Sixteenth annual report of the commissioner of labor’, House of Representatives (1901), vol. XVIGoogle Scholar.

³¹ Roosevelt, Theodore in Mayo, K., Justice for all (Boston, 1920), p. 9Google Scholar.

³² Pennsylvania state federation of labor, The American cossack (Washington, D.C., 1915)Google Scholar.

³³ Friedman, , Pinkerton labor spy, p. 4Google Scholar.

³⁴ Dubofsky, Melvyn, We shall be all (New York, 1969)Google Scholar; Friedman, The Pinkerton. The internal organization and typical operations of one of Pinkerton's regional offices have been provided for the public by Friedman, a disgruntled stenographer who absconded with some financial ledgers and secret information about the Denver office.

³⁵ Dubofsky, , We shall be all, p. 53Google Scholar.

³⁶ Levinson, E., I break strikes! (New York, 1935)Google Scholar.

³⁷ Levinson, , I break strikes!, also, Senate report no. 6, part I, 1939, p. 16Google Scholar; pp. 187–99, provides a job record and a criminal and arrest record for 150 strikeguards and strikebreakers.

³⁸ Brecker, J., Strike! (Boston, 1977), p. 103Google Scholar.

³⁹ Dubofsky, , We shall be all, p. 406Google Scholar.

⁴⁰ Brecker, , Strike!, p. 104Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Auerback, J.S., Labor and liberty (Indianapolis, 1966), p. 22Google Scholar.

⁴² Senate report no. 6, part I, 1939.

⁴³ Preston, W., Aliens and dissenters (New York, 1963)Google Scholar, passim.

⁴⁴ Lowenthal, Max, The federal bureau of investigation (New York, 1950)Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ Lowenthal, , The federal bureau, pp. 269–81Google Scholar.

⁴⁶ ‘Lawless disorders and their suppression’. Appendix to the annual report of the attorney general for the fiscal year of 1922, containing the correspondence relating to the action of the government with reference to the interruption by force of interstate commerce, the carriage of the mails, etc. in the year 1922. Printed pursuant to concurrent resolution of March 3, 1923, p.v.

⁴⁷ Lowenthal, The federal bureau. See hearings. House appropriations committee on department of justice appropriations for 1924, p. 71.

⁴⁸ ‘Lawless disorders and their suppression’, pp. 8, 76, 80, 288, 349, 371, 431, 452.

⁴⁹ Hearings. House appropriations committee on department of justice appropriations for 1924, pp. 71, 78.

⁵⁰ Millis, H. A. and Montgomery, R. E., Organized labor (New York, 1945), p. 638Google Scholar.

⁵¹ ‘I.W.W. exposes Burns’, Industrial Solidarity (no. 281), 22 March 1924; ‘Burns incited violence’, Industrial Solidarity (no. 282), 29 March 1924; see also, Howard, Sidney, The labor spy (New York, 1924), pp. 128–56Google Scholar.

⁵² Industrial Solidarity, 22 March 1924.

⁵³ ‘Burns used United States office to build up agency’, Industrial Solidarity, 22 March 1924.

⁵⁴ Industrial Solidarity, p. 1. Letter photographed and reproduced in its entirety.

⁵⁵ Industrial Solidarity, p. 3.

⁵⁶ ‘Accuse Burns in red trial’, New York Times, 21 April 1923, ‘Links Ruthenberg to reds’, New York Times, 24 April 1923

⁵⁷ New York Times, 24 April 1923 The Bureau frequently spent time helping enforce laws of the individual states

⁵⁸ New York Times, ‘Charges inciting of red outrages’, 13 February 1923

⁵⁹ Preston, , Aliens and dissenters, p 242Google Scholar.

⁶⁰ Howard, Sidney, ‘Our professional patriots’, The New Republic, 10 09 1924, p 40Google Scholar.

⁶¹ The New Republic, 10 September 1924 See also, Hapgood, Norman, Professional patriots (New York, 1927), p 99Google Scholar ‘Mr Samuel Gompers, though long opposed to Mr Burns as a labor spy and the representative of anti-union employers, had a common interest with him while he was in the Department Both were fighting Reds Mr Gompers in the unions, Mr Burns, anywhere Mr Easley was the friend of both So there was, in effect, a most extraordinary alliance – the secret service, organized labor, and big business, all united in a patriotic effort to down radicalism’.

⁶² ‘Daugherty ousted by Coolidge; turns on president and accusers’, New York Times, 29 May 1924.

⁶³ ‘W. J. Burns quits fed service; long under fire’, New York Times, 10 May 1924.

⁶⁴ ‘Burns sent agents to help build case against Wheeler’, New York Times, 11 April 1924; Ungar, S. J., The FBI (Boston, 1976), p. 46Google Scholar.

⁶⁵ Lowenthal, , The federal bureau of investigation, pp. 3–9Google Scholar.

⁶⁶ See Kolko, G., The triumph of conservatism (Chicago, 1963)Google Scholar and Weinstein, J., The corporate ideal and the liberal state (Boston, 1968)Google Scholar.

⁶⁷ See U.S. senate committee on education and labor, ‘The “little steel” strike and citizens' committees’. Report no. 151 (1941). Also, see: Auerbach, Labor and liberty; Silverberg, L. G., ‘Citizen's committees: their role in industrial conflict’, Public Opinion Quarterly, V (03, 1941)Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Brecker, , Strike!, p. 252Google Scholar.

⁶⁹ Braverman, Harry, Labor and monopoly capital (New York, 1974), p. 150Google Scholar.

⁷⁰ ‘In exchange for enforcing the no-strike pledge, unions had their hands upheld by being granted rights that greatly aided their growth, while making them less vulnerable to pressure from their own rank and file’, Brecker, , Strike!, p. 222Google Scholar.

⁷¹ ‘Bridges' setback’, Business Week 18 March 1944, pp. 83–4.

⁷² Brecker, , Strike!, p. 226Google Scholar.

⁷³ ‘For labor: readjustments’, Business Week, 18 August 1945.

⁷⁴ ‘U.S. takes brakes off wages’, Business Week, 25 August 1945; ‘Auto union forces showdown’, Business Week, 22 September 1945.

⁷⁵ Business Week, 25 August 1945.

⁷⁶ Business Week, 22 September 1945, pp. 99–100.

⁷⁷ Beynon, Huw, Working for Ford, (London 1973), pp. 29–30Google Scholar; Pierce, Frank, Crimes of the powerful (London, 1976), pp. 134–45Google Scholar; Sward, K., The legend of Henry Ford (New York, 1968)Google Scholar.

⁷⁸ ‘Ford runs Ford’, Business Week, 8 October 1945, pp. 18–19; ‘Ford brings more’, Business Week, 29 September 1945.

⁷⁹ ‘Ford employs new strategy’, Business Week, 20 July 1946, pp. 96–8.

⁸⁰ ‘BI's old grads’, Business Week, 20 july 1946, pp. 19–20.

⁸¹ Business Week, 8 December 1945; ‘Union time study’, Business Week, 29 August 1942.

⁸² As an example of how effective Bugas' new offensive tactics were, and how far the grounds of dispute had shifted, union bargainers countered Ford with an offer to bring unauthorised strikers up before a union trial board. ‘The union was kept so busy answering the company demands that it was not until a few days ago that it was able to inject its own call for 30 per cent in the discussion at all’, observed Business Week, 8 December 1945.

⁸³ ‘Two-way bargaining demand’, Business Week, 24 November 1945; ‘Clerical revolt’, Business Week, 15 September 1945; ‘White collared’, Business Week, 22 September 1945. White-collar workers were becoming increasingly discontent, and willing to show it in organizational activity. The September 1945 strike at Westinghouse dramatized the ‘revolt of the white-collar worker’. The close integration of plant and office idled 30,000 non-striking production workers, with the prospect of soon idling 60,000 more. This, one of the biggest strikes of white-collar workers, revealed the power that office employees possessed to stop manufacturing operations cold. Undermining unionization of the ‘new working class’ would provide a new area of ‘labour relations’ work for private detective agencies. See Huberman, , The labor spy racket (New York, 1966, rev. edn)Google Scholar.

⁸⁴ To ‘keep alive their old bonds, the ex-stalwarts of the FBI have created their own association’, the Society of Former Special Agents of the FBI, Inc., whose president at the time was a personnel executive of American Airlines, observed a 20 July 1946 Business Week article. The Society is a formal institutionalization of the ‘old boy network’ begun under Mr Burns. This fraternity serves as a recruitment and placement service for graduates, and Business Week continued, ‘relations with the old chief are cordial, almost reverent’. See also, ‘Post to FBI ex-agent’, Mew York Times, 25 September 1947, p. 44.