fifty licensed detectives. Under the detective license laws
each of these has been required to file with the State
comptroller written evidences of his competency, and
integrity, approved by five reputable freeholders of his
county, and to give bond in the sum of two thousand dollars.
He also has to pay a license fee of one hundred dollars per
annum, but this enables him to employ as many "operators"
as he chooses. In other words, the head of the agency may
be of good character and his agents wholly undesirable
citizens. How often this is the case is known to none better
than the heads themselves. The strength and efficiency of a
detective agency does not lie in the name at the top of its
letter-paper, but in the unknown personnel of the men who
are doing or shirking the work. I believe that most of the
principals of the many agencies throughout the United States
are animated by a serious desire to give their clients a full
return for their money and loyal and honest service. But the
best intentions in the world cannot make up for the lack of
untiring vigilance in supervising the men who are being
employed in the client's service.

It is the right here that the "national" has an immense
advantage over the small agency which cannot afford to keep a
large staff of men constantly on hand, but is forced to engage
them temporarily as they may be needed. The "national" agency
can shift its employees from place to place as their services
are required, and the advantages of centralization are felt as
much in this sort of work as in any other industry. The
licensed detective who sends out a hurry call for assistants
is apt to be able to get only men whom he would otherwise not