The Hood River glacier. (Hood River, Or.) 1889-1933, 1910-05-26

nothing but these interim receipts for
stock in the trust company, which he
says he was organizing. The North
TarrytoWn, N. Y. women refused to
give up the notes, and by simply pub
fishing the facts compelled Lewis to
pay them. In doing so, he made the
silly lying excuse that he offered to
pay them year before, but that Mr..
johnson, the postmaster, demanded a
fee for collecting them. This silly
lie was refuted when we showed the
records of the banks which attempted
to collect the notes after Lewis alleged
that he wanted to pay them. We would
like to know what excuse he has now
for not paying this note to Mr.. White.
"At one time Lewis was making
much of the fact that the Chase
National Bank, of New York City,
was his correspondent for his trust but
we understand Lewis was requested to
withdraw small account the carried
there, and we hear no more about this
bank correspondent.
''In addition to this note for $500 and
interest, we have other claims against
Lewis, mostly in 'interim receipts, !"
which were set in exchange for the
five per cent notes by the trickery ex-
planned above, amounting to $4,000.
These run in claims of children, ser
want girls, old women, decrepit men,
and feeble old soldiers, in amounts
from So up to $4,000. No sum was too
large or too small for Lews's greed ;
no condition of poverty or need was
sacred from his avarice. He would
take money from the child, the widow
and the infirm of old age with as little
compunction or conscience as one
would pick berry from roadside
bush. The confidence of his adult
victims made his operations as easy
as taking pennies from babies; and
some of the victims were virtually
babies. We repeat that we do not
know a single prominent and success
ful publication that is not Unidentified
with Lewis's American Women's
League scheme; but two or three of
the list affect responsibility, and have
defended Lewis in the past. We
would be interested to know what
excuse they make for Lewis's failure
to pay these obligations. Some of the
really responsible and usually reliable
papers like Golfers, Everybody's
Magazine, Farm Journal and Define
ator ran the advertising of the League
scheme last year; but soon discovered
the error, and withdrew from the
enterprise but the advertising gave
Lewis a certificate of repsectibility, as
he expected it would, and the League
scheme got some prominence in con
sequence. The mass of the readers
of these publications have no means
of knowing that the publisher have
now repudated Lewis, and it seems to
US that these publishers owe it to
their readers to tell them the facts.
Thus far Golfers Weekly is the only
one to refer to the subject editorially,
and its public reputation of Lewis was
not all that one might expect under
the circumstances. What is needed
is an aroused public sentiment against
this form of trickery. 1t is big task
for one paper to undertake alone; but
if readers of the R.N-Y., would in
terest themselves to the extent of
spreading the facts in every section
where Leagues are being organized,
Lewis would soon find it TO his interest
to send back the money he induced
these poor people to send him by his
green goods" methods.