Ponzi's Scheme_ The True Story of a Financial Legend - Mitchell Zuckoff [97]
The next morning, Saturday, July 31, the Post continued its drumbeat, this time quoting Washington postal officials as saying it was impossible for Ponzi to have made a fortune with reply coupons. The paper spent the rest of the weekend impatiently cracking the whip to urge the investigations onward. The peak came when a news story scolded Attorney General Allen, declaring, “All initiative in the case thus far has come from Mr. Gallagher’s office, with the attorney general’s office trailing behind and apparently not quite sure what to do.” While criticizing Allen for his evident inaction, the Post heaped praise on New Hampshire officials for initiating their own investigation. Alongside the story, a new editorial cartoon by Ritchie pictured a smiling Ponzi with a magic wand and a pot of money, surrounded by jealous price gougers, war profiteers, greedy landlords, and monopolists.
Unknown to Grozier or his reporters, or to Ponzi for that matter, the attorney general had surreptitiously begun his investigation by tapping Ponzi’s telephones at his home and office. Allen hoped to hear damaging admissions or clues about the nature of Ponzi’s mysterious business. But Ponzi never revealed anything to anyone. Allen’s phone minders only heard Ponzi talking about his idea to sell stock to the public, bank presidents and businessmen soliciting Ponzi’s business, and calls from various other people—police officials to professionals to newly arrived immigrants—seeking Ponzi’s money, time, help, advice, or all four. Allen also sent one of his assistants, Albert Hurwitz, to New York to check on Ponzi’s claims that he had sent more than a million dollars abroad via a Milan bank with a branch in Manhattan. Hurwitz’s trip was part of an emerging strategy by the attorney general to determine if Ponzi could be charged with “larceny by false pretenses.” It was a charge that depended on proving that Ponzi had knowingly made false statements with the intent to deceive. Lying to the attorney general about how and where he did business might fit the bill.
Meanwhile, Barron seconded the Post’s conclusion about the dubious profitability of postal coupons. Ignoring the $5 million lawsuit, Barron published an article on Saturday sarcastically suggesting that Ponzi use his incredible powers of financial alchemy to pay the costs of the Great War. “Surely the allies could spare him a million and within three years clean up that debt tangle. Germany might cheaply hire him to wipe out the indemnity within four years.”
Still, no crowds turned up that morning on School Street.
If Barron and the Post were openly hostile to Ponzi, the other Boston papers generally reported the unvarnished news of the run and the investigations. Although at times they displayed skepticism, for the most part they recounted the day’s events impartially. But in a city with so many different, competing voices, perhaps it was inevitable that one or two would root for Ponzi, pandering to the public’s embrace of him and maybe hoping that the powerful Post would fall on its face.
As newsboys for the Post were yelling about the paper’s exclusive Washington reporting, the Boston American was crowing over a gossamer interview with Rose Ponzi. The paper splashed a huge headline across its front page—WIFE TELLS OF PONZI’S PLANS—and printed a photo of the flattering portrait of Rose that hung in the Ponzis’ living room. Rose offered no revelations; she beamed with pride about “my Charles,” and the only plan she disclosed was a hoped-for trip to Florida “to idle away our time on a second honeymoon.” The story concluded: “A young woman, rarely beautiful, smiled in wifely triumph. For she was the woman married to the man who had made the dream come true.”
On the perfect summer day that story appeared, Mr. and Mrs. Charles