Café Terminus attack

On 12 February 1894, anarchist Émile Henry carried out a bomb attack against the people gathered in the Café Terminus in Paris, France. Undertaken during the period known as the Ère des attentats (1892–1894), it was one of the first acts of modern and mass terrorism in history and is also known for Henry's statement at his trial, which is considered a foundational element of this form of terrorism.

Following the passing of the lois scélérates ('villainous laws'), the repression of January and February 1894, and the executions of Ravachol and Auguste Vaillant without a pardon from French President Sadi Carnot, the latter became a symbolic enemy of the entire anarchist movement. The anarchists viewed Carnot as primarily responsible for the persecutions they faced. In early 1894, while the repression was ongoing, Émile Henry was in Paris and witnessed it. He was possibly joined by a number of illegalists from the Ortiz gang, such as Léon Ortiz or Paolo Chiericotti. While the involvement of these people is not certain, Henry crafted a bomb with which he intended to target Carnot.

On 12 February 1894, Henry attempted to go to the Élysée Palace, the residence of the French President, but could not get close. He then tried to "fall back" on the Opéra and the Hôtel de Ville, where Parisian aristocratic balls were underway, but he was unsuccessful in gaining entry. Determined to commit an attack, likely to impress the anarchist he loved, Élisa Gauthey, he assessed several Parisian restaurants before targeting the Café Terminus, where he threw his bomb around nine in the evening. Fleeing, he was quickly arrested, tried, and guillotined. Carnot was assassinated by Italian anarchist Sante Geronimo Caserio a few months later.

At his trial, Henry claimed to have premeditated and theorized this form of terrorism, making him frequently considered one of the founders of modern terrorism. According to his argument, he "struck indiscriminately, without choosing [his] victims" to retaliate against the state's similar actions toward anarchists. However, recent historians temper this view. They point out that his erratic and poorly planned movements make the idea of him premeditating mass terrorism unlikely, especially since he initially targeted Carnot and then aristocratic balls. These historians suggest that his desire to impress Gauthey was more likely the catalyst for this act of mass terrorism, rather than a well-thought-out premeditation rooted in anarchist ideology. He also amplified the violence of his statements to help his companions avoid legal prosecution.

While this specific form of mass terrorism was not replicated in subsequent anarchist propaganda of the deed actions—which generally pursued more traditional forms of tyrannicide (the assassination of specific rulers, leaders, or their delegates)—it has held a central place in modern terrorism, at least until the early part of the 21st century.