What if the Anti-Pinkerton Act was never signed?

Neirdak

Banned
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency)

In 1871, Congress appropriated $50,000 to the new Department of Justice (DOJ) to form a suborganization devoted to "the detection and prosecution of those guilty of violating federal law." The amount was insufficient for the DOJ to fashion an integral investigating unit, so the DOJ contracted out the services to the Pinkerton National Detective Agency.

However, since passage of the Anti-Pinkerton Act in 1893, federal law has stated that an "individual employed by the Pinkerton Detective Agency, or similar organization, may not be employed by the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.

The Act : from http://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title5-section3108&num=0&edition=prelim

§3108. Employment of detective agencies; restrictions

An individual employed by the Pinkerton Detective Agency, or similar organization, may not be employed by the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.
(Pub. L. 89– 554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 416.)

Historical and Revision Notes

Derivation

U.S. Code
5 U.S.C. 53.

Revised Statutes and Statutes at Large
Mar. 3, 1893, ch. 208 (5th par. under "Public Buildings"), 27 Stat. 591.

The prohibition is restated in positive form.

Standard changes are made to conform with the definitions applicable and the style of this title as outlined in the preface to the report.

An exegesis from 1980's
http://www.gao.gov/assets/180/171215.pdf

What if the Anti-Pinkerton Act was never signed? :eek:
 
Last edited:
Unions might be even weaker than they are now? Conversely you could have the Socialists win elections in the 1920s and later, maybe replacing the Democratic or Republican Party.
 

Morty Vicar

Banned
125 viewers and no answer :(

Interesting question, but I have no idea the result. Whilst on one hand it may mean harsher treatment of unions and strikers, on the other a more radical labor movement may well emerge in response.
 
Last edited:
From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinkerton_(detective_agency)



What if the Anti-Pinkerton Act was never signed? :eek:

I confess I don't know much about them, but considering that the Pinkertons were basically modern day mercenaries, wouldn't that mean that various US companies, and the US government, would be able to employ their services? If so, we'd basically see the rise of private armies, though what that would mean long-term for US foreign and domestic affairs is anyone's guess.
 

Neirdak

Banned
Here is the big thing :

In 1871, Congress appropriated $50,000 to the new Department of Justice (DOJ) to form a suborganization devoted to "the detection and prosecution of those guilty of violating federal law." The amount was insufficient for the DOJ to fashion an integral investigating unit, so the DOJ contracted out the services to the Pinkerton National Detective Agency.

However, since passage of the Anti-Pinkerton Act in 1893, federal law has stated that an "individual employed by the Pinkerton Detective Agency, or similar organization, may not be employed by the Government of the United States or the government of the District of Columbia.

I can see a lot of butterflies :

- If the government continued to hire Pinkertons to protect US presidents, it could avoid the murder of McKinley and thus postpone the use of the USSS as a protective agency and USSS could become an internal and external Intelligence Service.

- If the DOJ continued to hire Pinkertons as an integral investigating unit, it could postpone the creation of the BOI (Bureau of Investigation).

- If the government continued to hire Pinkertons for the Intelligence Service, it could abort CIA in favor of a Pinkerton-USSS system.


- ...
 
Last edited:
That would lead to a stronger Socialist party. Which means when Wilson tries to stifle it, you probably would see violence and perhaps another Civil War in the 1920's Falcon 20 years early during WWI?
 
That would lead to a stronger Socialist party. Which means when Wilson tries to stifle it, you probably would see violence and perhaps another Civil War in the 1920's Falcon 20 years early during WWI?

WILSON EEEEEEVVVVIIIIILLLLLLLL :mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

Even though butterflies might lead to changes in the election results. Debs 1916? TR term three anyone?
 
To be fair, he did squash the socialists in a pretty non-constitutional manner.

Make a more radical Socialist party, butterfly away McKinley assassination, TR doesn't win the nomination in 1908, add some violence, you would likely see a heavy crackdown that would be resisted.

I don't think a red USA would happen, but we could see red states, which then are called "in insurrection", and who knows what could happen there?
 
Possibly the USA might enter into a vicious circle like many states in Central and Latin America where the government violently alternates between outright dictatorships (most of these right-wing / millitary) and democracies so corrupt they make the modern lobbyist system look like a bunch of Scouts.
 
Top