Correction with apologies

[L Verge]

Just a few notes on Lafayette Baker - a very colorful character in his own right. He earned his right to be considered secret police back in the 1850s when he was in the midst of the unlawful, illegal, whatever-you-want-to call the California society of gold-rush days. He became a member of the Vigilance Committee in an attempt to end some corruption.

When the Civil War began, he served at the beginning of the war as a civilian spy in Richmond for Gen. Winfield Scott. He then moved on to become a secret agent for the Department of State under Seward. He eventually became the "replacement" for Allan Pinkerton, serving under the Office of the Provost-Marshal in D.C., beginning in February of 1862. This put him under the War Department and Sec. Stanton in what was/is termed the National Detective Police and also turned him from civilian detective to a commission of colonel - but still an excellent and efficient spy and enforcer given his ruthless way of doing things.

This ruthlessness got the best of him later in the war, and he was demoted and sent to New York under the watchful eye of Assistant Sec. of War Charles Dana. He was in New York at the time of the assassination and summoned back by Stanton. For more information, check out this link: http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/hist/secrets.htm.

Question: Why is National Detective Police a misnomer?

---

(10-19-2013 02:25 PM)L Verge Wrote:  Just a few notes on Lafayette Baker - a very colorful character in his own right. He earned his right to be considered secret police back in the 1850s when he was in the midst of the unlawful, illegal, whatever-you-want-to call the California society of gold-rush days. He became a member of the Vigilance Committee in an attempt to end some corruption.

When the Civil War began, he served at the beginning of the war as a civilian spy in Richmond for Gen. Winfield Scott. He then moved on to become a secret agent for the Department of State under Seward. He eventually became the "replacement" for Allan Pinkerton, serving under the Office of the Provost-Marshal in D.C., beginning in February of 1862. This put him under the War Department and Sec. Stanton in what was/is termed the National Detective Police and also turned him from civilian detective to a commission of colonel - but still an excellent and efficient spy and enforcer given his ruthless way of doing things.

This ruthlessness got the best of him later in the war, and he was demoted and sent to New York under the watchful eye of Assistant Sec. of War Charles Dana. He was in New York at the time of the assassination and summoned back by Stanton. For more information, check out this link: http://mysite.du.edu/~jcalvert/hist/secrets.htm.

Question: Why is National Detective Police a misnomer?

Actually, I may have just answered my own question by doing a little research on the Central Intelligence Agency's history portion of its website:

There was no centrally directed intelligence agency in Washington. Pinkerton and Baker worked only for their superiors. They ran their organizations so independently and so competitively that, in at least two cases, the operatives of one “secret service” arrested or kept under surveillance the operatives of the other.

The Union never developed a need for a national intelligence agency. The gathering of intelligence was, in fact, so decentralized that President Lincoln himself even hired an agent on his own, paid him, and personally received the agent’s reports. William A. Lloyd, a publisher of railroad and steamer guides for railroads and steamers in the South, approached Lincoln early in the war, looking for a pass through Confederate lines so that he could continue his business. Lincoln had a better idea: “Use the pass to go to the South and spy for me”—at $200 a month plus expenses. (This would have the equivalent purchasing power of about $4,000 today.)