Publication information
view printer-friendly version
Source: Minneapolis Journal
Source type: newspaper
Document type: article
Document title: “Pinkerton Perplexed”
Author(s): anonymous
City of publication: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Date of publication: 12 September 1901
Volume number: none
Issue number: none
Pagination: 3

“Pinkerton Perplexed.” Minneapolis Journal 12 Sept. 1901: p. 3.
full text
William A. Pinkerton; William A. Pinkerton (public statements); anarchists; McKinley assassination (investigation of conspiracy: Chicago, IL); Chicago, IL (police department); McKinley assassination (personal response); Secret Service (criticism); anarchism.
Named persons
Leon Czolgosz; Emma Goldman; William McKinley; Francis O’Neill; Lucy E. Parsons; William A. Pinkerton.


Pinkerton Perplexed


Points He Does Not Understand—Anarchism Farreaching [sic].

New York Sun Special Service

     New York, Sept. 12.—If there is one man in this country who knows a lot about anarchists and their ways it is William A. Pinkerton, head of the Pinkerton Detective Bureau. Mr. Pinkerton is not sanguine when discussing the probability of unearthing a plot to kill the president. He said:
     The anarchists don’t plot. They are not persons of action. They sit around and somebody says that somebody ought to be put out of the way. One of the group announces that he is going to do the deed, and when he does it, nobody is more surprised than the very men who suggested his act. I will say, though, that if there was a plot the Chicago police will dig it out. They are closer to the anarchists than any policemen in the country and have been ever since the Haymarket riot. If Chief O’Neill says he has information leading him to believe that there was a plot, there is something to it.
     There are two points about the shooting of President McKinley that interest me. One is, where is the man who shook hands with him just before Czolgosz? If he is on the level, why doesn’t he come forth and say so? The very fact that he has not appeared is evidence of a plot. He knows he was the last man to shake the president’s hand, and that an attempt has been made to kill the president. Why doesn’t he come out and tell the police who he is? If he is honest and had nothing to do with Czolgosz, he can prove it. If he is afraid to show himself, there must be a reason for it. The second point is, how the secret service men could allow the assassin to approach the president with his hand wrapped up in a handkerchief. I don’t want to cast reflections, but I must say that this move was extremely unwise.
     Getting back to the anarchists, I would say that the most troublesome feature about them is the women membership. The women are worse than the men. Women like Emma Goldman and Lucy Parsons can do more harm than a hundred bewhiskered anarchists. They are more rabid and more unscrupulous. The country would be surprised should the full strength of the anarchist movement be known. My men in Chicago brought me astounding reports of the far-reaching effects of the movement in that city. I could scarcely believe the evidence. Men and women of education and refinement and influence all over the country are in the movement. Thy [sic] are not advocates of force and assassination, but they are advocates of the principles of anarchy in general, and they are willing to fight for them. The many expressions of sympathy for Czolgosz and his act reported from various parts of the United States do not surprise me.



top of page