46. See Friedman, The Pinkerton Labor Spy, pp. 156–71. The operative in question was Robert M. Smith. Concurrently, Pinkerton’s undercover operatives were fulfilling similar assignments in other areas. Thomas J. Williams helped prevent the United Mine Workers from unionizing the Wyoming Union Pacific Coal Company at Rock Springs, and Frank E. Cochran was so successful in his undercover role at the Mountain Copper Company in Keswick, California, that the WFM named him its national organizer (Friedman, The Pinkerton Labor Spy, pp. 172–83).
47. For the attempt to wreck the train, see Jameson, All that Glitters, pp. 210–11, and Rastall, The Labor History of the Cripple Creek District, pp. 103–7; for the murder of Collins, see Gressley, Bostonians and Bullion, p. 101, and Martin, The Corpse on Boomerang Road, pp. 162–63.
48. For a detailed account of the strike in the Telluride, see Martin, The Corpse on Boomerang Road, pp. 194–266.
49. Quoted in Jameson, All that Glitters, p. 219.
50. Edward McParland, in SIH, vol. 6, 3065. For his full testimony, see SIH, vol. 6, pp. 3063–69.
51. Edward McParland, in SIH, vol. 6, 3066.
52. U.S. Senate, A Report on Labor Disturbances in the State of Colorado, p. 267.
53. Jameson, All that Glitters, p. 230.
54. Grinstead and Fogelberg, Western Voices, p. 184; see also The Denver Post, Nov. 21, 2008.
55. Quote from CAS, Two Evil Isms, pp. 24–25; see also Suggs, Colorado’s War on Militant Unionism, pp. 186–87.
56. Brundage, The Making of Western Labor Radicalism.
57. The Ocala Banner, Jan. 16, 1903; see also The Ocala Evening Star, Jan. 14, 1903.
58. JM, letter to RAP, June 13, 1903, LoC, box 30, folder 11.
59. Ibid.
60. Ibid., June 18, 1903.
61. Ibid.
62. McParland’s description of the symptoms—as well as the way in which improvement eventually occurred—suggests that the cause could actually have been a macular edema, a swelling or thickening of the macula, the part of the retina responsible for detailed central vision. This can be caused by fluid leaking from retinal or choroidal blood vessels. Not infrequently this resolves itself naturally, as could have been the case for McParland (Doheny Eye Institute, personal communication, Dec. 16, 2011).
63. JM, letter to RAP, June 18, 1903, LoC, box 30, folder 11.
64. Ibid., June 22, 1903.
65. Ibid., June 25, 1903.
66. JM, letter to GDB, Sept. 5, 1903, LoC, box 30, folder 11.
67. JM, letter to “Doc” Shores, Sept. 7, 1904, LoC, box 30, folder 11.
68. Quote from JM, letter to WAP, Feb. 22, 1905, LoC, box 30, folder 11; other details from John C. Fraser, letter to GDB, Feb. 15, 1905; John C. Fraser, letter to WAP, July 22, 1905; and JM, letters to GDB, Aug. 8, 17, 1905, LoC, box 30, folder 11.
69. The New York Times, April 17, 1904.
70. RAP, letter to WAP, Sept. 15, 1905, LoC, box 30, folder 11.
71. Robert Pinkerton, born in 1848, was about three years younger than McParland, but he died in 1907 at the age of only fifty-nine.
72. For a fuller account of the investigation of Ingram’s death, and other Pinkerton’s cases in Canada, see Williams, Call in Pinkerton’s.
73. For McParland’s report and related information, see Royal Canadian Mounted Police Papers RG18, Library and Archives Canada.
Chapter 19: A Murder and a Confession
1. The Idaho Daily Statesman, Jan. 10, 1906; Clay, The Assassination of Ex-Gov. Steunenberg, p. 32.
2. Grover, Debaters and Dynamiters, p. 59; Horsley, The Confessions and Autobiography of Harry Orchard, p. 218.
3. Details of Steunenberg’s assassination and final moments, and of the local actions taken in the aftermath, are from Josephine Steunenberg, letter to Grace Crookham, Jan. 10, 1906, G. L. Crookham Papers MS 189.1–13; Will Steunenberg, letter to Delia Brobst, Jan. 13, 1906, G. L. Crookham Papers MS 191.1–8; Nina Steunenberg, letter to Delia Brobst, Jan. 13, 1906, G. L. Crookham Papers MS 193.1–9 (all at The College of Idaho); Steunenberg, The Martyr of Idaho; and editions in the following days of The Caldwell News, The Caldwell Tribune, and Evening Capital News. The quote is from Charles Steunenberg, letter to Delia Brobst, Jan. 13, 1906, G. L. Crookham Papers MS 195.1–4, The College of Idaho.
4. Grover, Debaters and Dynamiters, p. 60.
5. Lukas, Big Trouble, p. 67.
6. For the prosecution of the fraud and arson cases, see The Columbus Courier for February and March 1886; for information on Stockslager’s background, see Allison, History of Cherokee County, Kansas; Cutler, History of the State of Kansas; Hawley, History of Idaho, vol. 1.
7. Idaho officials seeking investigative help from an outside agency was not unusual. As in Pennsylvania in the 1870s, Idaho had no state police force, its attorney general had no investigative staff, local sheriffs and constables tended to have no significant training in probing serious crime, and the federal government did not have a bureau that could assist the states. See Fuld, Police Administration; Calhoun, The Lawmen; Prassel, The Western Peace Officer.
8. McParland’s animus to Swain went back almost two decades, to when he first took over the Denver office. At that point Swain was Denver’s chief of detectives, a position to which he had risen in only a few years since joining the police department in 1883. The two men were much alike in some ways—proud, smug, and aggressive—and quickly found themselves at odds over the way their overlapping investigations were handled and as competitors for acclaim and recognition. McParland also developed a great disdain for Swain’s recklessness, which was highlighted in incidents in which he fired down a crowded street and later gunned down a depressed man fumbling around with an unloaded pistol. Although Swain was cleared legally of the latter charge, the public protests over his behavior led him to resign from the force. Not long thereafter, he joined Thiel’s agency, and in 1899 experienced great success with his use of undercover agent Edward L. Zimmerman in the Wardner union. Needless to say, this only made McParland’s antagonism greater, and the Great Detective never missed a chance to score against his rival.
9. W. S. Swain, report to FRG, Jan. 2, 1906, ISA, folder 1.
10. Evening Capital News, Jan. 3, 1906.
11. Testimony of Bill Haywood, in SIH, vol. 9, 4093–95.
12. W. S. Swain, report to FRG, Jan. 3, 1906, ISA, folder 1.
13. Evening Capital News, Jan. 9, 1906; The Idaho Daily Statesman, Jan. 9, 1906; Grover, Debaters and Dynamiters, pp. 60–61.
14. W. S. Swain, report to FRG, Jan. 3, 1906, ISA, folder 1.
15. Grover, Debaters and Dynamiters, pp. 61–62; Connolly, “The Moyer-Haywood Case: Part 1: The Murder and the Arrest of Orchard,” pp. 20–23. In fact, Miller did not reach Caldwell until January 8, after disembarking from his train in Walla Walla, Washington. Although Miller claimed this was because he was ill, it has been speculated that he was reluctant to be involved once he had discovered in the news reports of January 4 that Hogan was actually Orchard. That same day, Simpkins sent a telegram to the WFM headquarters in Denver, stating: “Cannot get a lawyer to defend Hogan. Answer.” It is possible that Simpkins had arranged for Miller to be the attorney but without giving him full details. And it is likely that Miller continued to Caldwell only after being in contact with other members of the WFM executive board. The situation was never clarified, because during the subsequent trials, Miller could not be called by the prosecution, because he joined the defense team and spent most of the trial in California taking depositions.
16. Frank Gooding, telegram to Fred T. Dubois, Dec. 30, 1905, reprinted in The Rocky Mountain News, March 1, 1906; Will Steunenberg, letter to Delia Brobst, Jan. 13, 1906, G. L. Crookham Papers MS 191.1–8, The College of Idaho. Among the newspapers espousing this theory, see Daily Press, Dec. 31, 1905; The Hawaiian Star, Jan. 1, 1906; Los Angeles Herald, Dec. 31, 1905; The New Y
ork Times, Dec. 31, 1905; The Salt Lake Herald, Dec. 31, 1905; The San Francisco Call, Dec. 31, 1905; The Sun, Dec. 31, 1905.
17. Hawley, History of Idaho, vol. 1; McConnell, Early History of Idaho, pp. 372–75.
18. See Gramm, “The Free Silver Movement in America”; Argersinger, Silver Republicans, p. 689.
19. U.S. House of Representatives, Coeur d’Alene Labor Troubles, pp. 24–25.
20. Details of the events of April 29 are taken from The Idaho State Tribune, May 3, 1899; Hawley, History of Idaho, vol. 1, 251–56; U.S. House of Representatives, Coeur d’Alene Labor Troubles, pp. 6–7, 22–23; Fahey, The Days of Hercules, pp. 26–30.
21. Frank Steunenberg, telegram to William McKinley, April 29, 1899, quoted in Lukas, Big Trouble, p. 115.
22. U.S. Senate, Coeur d’Alene Mining Troubles, p. 4.
23. U.S. House of Representatives, Coeur d’Alene Labor Troubles, pp. 127–28.
24. U.S. Senate, Coeur d’Alene Mining Troubles, pp. 6–7.
25. U.S. House of Representatives, Coeur d’Alene Labor Troubles, pp. 114–15; Grover, Debaters and Dynamiters, p. 38,
26. Jameson, All that Glitters, pp. 216, 220–21.
27. Lukas, Big Trouble, p. 150.
28. For the interactions between the soldiers of the Twenty-fourth and the miners, see Cooper, The Army and Civil Disorder, pp. 170–84; Laurie and Cole, The Role of Federal Military Forces in Domestic Disorders, pp. 171–72.
29. Haywood, “Socialism the Hope of the Working Class,” p. 467.
30. The Idaho Daily Statesman, May 19, 1906.
31. Belle Steunenberg, in The Idaho Daily Statesman, June 7, 1907.
32. Ibid.
33. Quoted in JM, letter to J. C. Fraser, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
34. James Nevins, letter to JM, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
35. JM, letter to James Nevins, Jan. 11, 1906, and James Nevins, letter to JM, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
36. JM, letter to James Nevins, Jan. 8, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
37. Details of and quotes from this meeting come from JM, letter to James Nevins, Jan. 11, 1906, and WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Jan. 10, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
38. WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Jan. 10, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
39. JM, letter to J. C. Fraser, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
40. WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Jan. 14, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
41. JM, letter to J. C. Fraser, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
42. Ibid.
43. Details of and quotes from this meeting come from JM, letter to J. C. Fraser, January 13, 1906, and WAP (for JM), reports to FRG, Jan. 12, 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
44. JM, letter to J. C. Fraser, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
45. WAP (for JM), reports to FRG, Jan. 17, 18, 1906, ISA, folder 4; JM, letter to J. C. Fraser, Jan. 13, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 1.
46. Details of and quotes from McParland’s first meeting with Orchard come from WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Jan. 22, 1906, ISA, folder 4.
47. The man McParland referred to was Manus Cull, alias Kelly the Bum. McParland’s memory failed him just a bit here, as the actual murder victim was Alexander Rea.
48. In his testimony at the Haywood trial, Morris Friedman stated that “in the course of dictation Mr. McParland very frequently made allusions to the Inner Circle of the Western Federation of Miners”; see SIH, vol. 6, p. 2910.
49. McParland’s belief in the concept of the inner circle has been commented upon scornfully by his skeptics, for example, Friedman, The Pinkerton Labor Spy, p. 23; Kenny, Making Sense of the Molly Maguires, p. 283; Martin, The Corpse on Boomerang Road, pp. 169, 273, 292. However, it was used prior to the entry of Pinkerton’s into the Steunenberg murder investigation in numerous newspapers, including Deseret Evening News, Jan. 1, 1906; Los Angeles Herald, Dec. 31, 1905; The New York Times, Dec. 31, 1905; New-York Tribune, Dec. 31, 1905; The Salt Lake Herald, Dec. 31, 1905; The San Francisco Call, Dec. 31, 1905.
50. Details of and quotes from McParland’s second meeting with Orchard—except for those noted—come from WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Jan. 25, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 2.
51. Horsley, The Confessions and Autobiography of Harry Orchard, pp. 231–32.
52. Ibid., p. 233.
53. Orchard, “The Confession and Autobiography of Harry Orchard, Parts 1–5”; Horsley, The Confessions and Autobiography of Harry Orchard.
54. Hinks, “A Personal Note of Introduction,” p. ix.
55. JM, reports to FRG, Jan. 27–28, 1906, and Jan. 28–29, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 2.
56. JM, report to FRG, Jan. 31, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 2.
57. For the claims made in Orchard’s confession, see JM, reports to FRG, Jan. 27–28, 28–29, 31, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 2.
58. For example, Carlson, Roughneck, pp. 140–41; Martin, The Corpse on Boomerang Road, pp. 273–74; Stone, Darrow for the Defence, pp. 204–5.
59. JM, reports to FRG, Jan. 28–29, 31, 1906, LoC, box 172, folder 2.
60. Ibid.
61. See, for example, WAP (for JM), reports to FRG, Jan. 29, Feb. 3, 9, April 6, 8, 1906, ISA, folders 4, 5, and 9.
Chapter 20: Battle Lines Are Drawn
1. For details of the life and assassination of McKinley, see Morgan, William McKinley and His America; Miller, The President and the Assassin.
2. WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Feb. 3, 1906, ISA, folder 5.
3. Details of Hawley’s career are taken from MacLane, A Sagebrush Lawyer; “Hon. James H. Hawley.”
4. MacLane, A Sagebrush Lawyer, p. 87.
5. The San Francisco Call, Feb. 19, 1906; New-York Tribune, Feb. 20, 1906; The Nebraska Advertiser, March 2, 1906; Bisbee Daily Review, March 3, 1906.
6. The current Idaho Statutes, Title 19 (Criminal Procedure), Chapter 21 (Trial), Section 2117 (Testimony of Accomplice—Corroboration), reads: “A conviction cannot be had on the testimony of an accomplice, unless he is corroborated by other evidence, which in itself, and without the aid of the testimony of the accomplice, tends to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense; and the corroboration is not sufficient, if it merely shows the commission of the offense, or the circumstances thereof.” This is the same wording as was in Section 7871 of the Revised Statutes of Idaho Territory, 1887, which were in force at the time of the Steunenberg murder investigations.
7. Grover, Debaters and Dynamiters, p. 69. Simpkins’s disappearance makes the claim by Swain that he knew exactly where he was and that he could be arrested at any time either false or, in not picking him up, the greatest single blunder in the investigation. Simpkins was later reported in Idaho, Washington, Oregon, Colorado, Mexico, and as far afield as Australia and Singapore. Rumors abounded not only about where he might be but even if he were still alive—or if he had been murdered by the WFM to ensure his silence. Alternatively, it was speculated that he had been a Pinkerton’s operative and that the agency decided he could never testify, as it would ruin his cover. This seems unlikely, because of the significance of the case and Pinkerton’s use of other agents to testify in important situations.
8. WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Feb. 2, 1906, ISA, folder 5. The relevant legal ruling for the situation the prosecution faced had been made in 1903 in Hyatt v. People of State of New York, in which the U.S. Supreme Court had determined that the Constitution’s extradition clause required that anyone being extradited must have fled from the state where the crime had occurred.
9. WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Feb. 4, 1906, ISA, folder 5.
10. The full details of the plan to bring Haywood, Moyer, and Pettibone to Idaho come from WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Feb. 8, 1906, ISA, folder 5; WAP (for JM), reports to FRG, Feb. 16, 17, 1906, ISA, folder 6.
11. For a full
list of the cipher code, see JM, attachment to letter to J. H. Hawley, Feb. 8, 1906, ISA, folder 5.
12. For example, see charges of them being “perjured papers” in Carlson, Roughneck, p. 93.
13. This technicality was explained in Instruction 21 to the jury in the State of Idaho v. William D. Haywood, when Judge Fremont Wood quoted Section 7697 of the Revised Statutes of Idaho Territory, 1887: “The jury is instructed that the defendant in this case is charged as a principal under our statute, which provided that ‘The distinction between an accessory before the fact and a principal and between principals in the first and second degree in cases of felony, is abrogated, and all persons concerned in the commission of an offense, whether they directly commit the act constituting the offense, or aid and abet in its commission, though not present, shall hereafter be prosecuted, tried and punished as principals, and no other facts need be alleged in any indictment against an accessory than are required in an indictment against his principal’” (SIH: vol. 11, 5407–8). According to Hawley’s interpretation, this meant that, as Haywood, Moyer, and Pettibone were technically principals in the crime, “under our law they were constructively here. . . . It is necessary in the affidavit and the request that the party should be treated as having . . . departed from the jurisdiction about the time of its commission” (James H. Hawley, instructions to Owen Van Duyn, Feb. 10, 1906, letterpress book 56, James Henry Hawley Papers [M48], Idaho State Archives; emphasis added by author).
14. WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Feb. 8, 1906, ISA, folder 5. Orchard had stated that Adams had murdered Collins on the order of St. John.
15. Harry Orchard, quoted in WAP (for JM), report to FRG, Feb. 9, 1906. ISA, folder 5.
16. McParland’s mentioning here, and at other times, the role of divine providence has been interpreted by one of his harshest critics as indicative of his “personal belief that he had a divine mandate,” that he must have considered himself “the mouthpiece of Divine Providence,” and that “he believed his authority came from ‘Divine Providence’” (Martin, The Corpse on Boomerang Road, pp. 146, 283, 311). However McParland lived in an age when people owned a strong belief in the role of providence in their lives. It was common for people to call upon providence at times of need, to acknowledge providence at moments of success, and even to curse providence for their failures. For example, the expedition accounts of polar and African explorers, the journals of military officers, and the diaries of political figures are all replete with references to providence. Thus, rather than suggesting anything about McParland’s ego, this aspect of his behavior simply shows him to be a man of his time.
Pinkerton’s Great Detective Page 67