Hero & Herod

At 2:53 a. m. on Sunday, Dec. 22, Charles Augustus Lindbergh, with his wife Anne Morrow Lindbergh and their 3-year-old son Jon, sailed furtively out of New York Harbor toward Europe aboard the S. S. American Importer. On that slender foundation of fact the U. S. Press last week reared as enormous a fabric of conjecture, rumor, implication and denunciation as has been built in nearly two thousand years on the 67-word story of the Flight into Egypt.* News of the Lindbergh flight broke in the final Monday edition of the New York Times, on the streets at 4 a. m. The New York American, morning Hearstpaper, cribbed the Times' copyright story, slapped it on the front page of an extra edition. The rest of Manhattan's morning newspapers were left sitting on their hands.

Since Colonel Lindbergh had offered no public explanation of his departure, and radiograms sent to him on the American Importer were returned with the notation "Addressee not aboard," the Times' story remained the scripture on which the week's exegesis was built. It was written by bespectacled Lauren D. ("Deac") Lyman, who as the Times' aviation editor befriended obscure young Aviator Lindbergh before his flight to Paris in 1927. Throughout the week Reporter Lyman stoutly refused to reveal the source of his scoop. But Colonel Lindbergh's hatred of certain sensational newspapers, and his corresponding affection for the courteous Times, have long been well-known. Therefore Newshawk Lyman's statements could reasonably be accepted as authentic, possibly firsthand.

In keeping with the Times' policy of protecting Hero Lindbergh's privacy, Reporter Lyman weakened his otherwise first-rate scoop by failing to disclose the time and place of the Lindberghs' sailing, their ship's name, their exact destination. But he did state flatly the following facts:

The Lindberghs had secretly obtained passports in Washington a week in advance, slipped away from the Morrow home in Englewood, N. J. with farewells only to the immediate family. The only passengers aboard their ship, they were now bound for England to establish a home which might be permanent. They had been driven to this decision by mounting threats to kidnap or kill Son Jon. They had chosen England because they believed the English to be the world's most law-abiding people. Their chief aim was to give Jon a normal childhood. Colonel Lindbergh, though he might become the No. 1 expatriate, did not intend to give up his U. S. citizenship.

Expanding on reasons for the Lindberghs' move, Reporter Lyman reviewed the tide of threatening letters from cranks and crooks which had begun in 1927, ebbed & flowed as the Lindberghs were more or less prominent on the nation's front pages. Since the kidnapping of Charles A. Lindbergh Jr., Federal, State and local police had guarded the Lindberghs unremittingly, traced some of the threats, made a few arrests. Still the famed family lived in fear. Gratified were they when threats died down as excitement over Bruno Richard Hauptmann's arrest and conviction diminished. Then came two deciding events. Last month New Jersey's Governor Harold Giles Hoffman caused a fresh Press furor over Murderer Hauptmann by paying a midnight visit to his death cell, publicly reviving old doubts that the German carpenter was solely responsible for the Hopewell crime (TIME, Dec. 23). Promptly threats against Jon Lindbergh took on new volume and violence. Meantime the Lindberghs were thoroughly alarmed by an incident in Englewood. As Jon was being motored to his nursery school a large automobile sped up, forced the Lindbergh car to the curb. Strange men leaped out, thrust cameras at the child (see cut), sped away. Since then Jon had not been to school. "National Disgrace-- First reaction of U. S. editors to news of the Lindbergh flight was to beat their breasts in shame, to deplore U. S. lawlessness for driving the Nation's No. i hero into foreign exile. "It is a national disgrace . . ." moaned the San Francisco Chronicle. "No battle lost could bring the American People so great a humiliation," gloomed the Chicago Tribune. "Nations have exiled their heroes before," boomed the New York Herald Tribune. "They have broken them in misunderstanding or persecuted them with meanness. But when has a nation made life unbearable to one of its most distinguished men through a sheer inability to protect him from its criminals and lunatics and the vast vulgarity of its sensationalists? ... It seems as incredible as it is shocking. . . . The Lindberghs can live with some freedom in England . . . because of the adult public sense of good taste, restraint and respect for individual right and privacies which underlies the British freedom from crime."

"If it is said that this is the price which must be paid in America for celebrity . . ." barked the Baltimore Sun, "so much the worse for America!"

While their editors groveled, reporters scurried around in search of news, added a few facts and a mass of apocrypha to the Times' scripture. By Monday afternoon it was revealed that the Lindberghs had sailed on the U. S. Lines' small American Importer, a cargo liner of 7,590 tons. Not even the ship's officers had known who their passengers were to be until Colonel Lindbergh marched into the captain's cabin with his familiar, "I am Charles Lindbergh." All arrangements had been made by a U. S. Lines vice president, who had thoughtfully put aboard a six-foot Christmas tree, ornaments, three Christmas stockings. The Lindberghs had paid the standard rate of $280 for two and a half one-way fares. It was reported that the Lindberghs would have a Christmas dinner of turkey with all the trimmings. It was reported that the Lindberghs would have a Christmas dinner of roast pork & applesauce. It was reported that the Lindberghs had been accompanied by three servants, by two servants, by no servants.

International News Service was led to believe that the Lindberghs had fled simply to escape the approaching tumult over Murderer Hauptmann's execution scheduled for this month. The New York Sun reported that Mrs. Hauptmann had planned to take her child to the Lindberghs' doorstep on Christmas Day, plead for her husband's life. Canvassing of every available Lindbergh relative and associate brought confidential information that the Lindberghs had gone away ''for a three-week Christmas vacation." "until spring," "for a year," "forever."

Quitter? Coward? Editorial sentiment was overwhelmingly but not unanimously with the fleeing Lindberghs. After a conventional expression of shame and regret, the Milwaukee Journal declared: "We say that after making due allowance for the somewhat peculiar personality of Colonel Lindbergh."

More daring. James M. Cox's Dayton (Ohio) Daily News observed: "It is not the game thing the Lindberghs do. -. . There is something of the quitter in this running away from one's own country's woes."

In Chicago, Mayor Edward J. Kelly snorted: "If Colonel Lindbergh is correctly quoted in the newspapers, I think his action is ridiculous."

In Kansas City, City Manager Henry F. McElroy whose daughter was kidnapped two years ago (TIME. July 24, 1933 et seq) sneered: "It is an act of cowardice and the country would be better off without him if such is true. I cannot believe it." LL S, v. England. United Press reminded its readers that Motormen Errett Lobban Cord and Horace E. Dodge, also threatened by kidnappers, had taken their children to England without fanfare. Scripps-Howard newspapers distinguished themselves with an editorial from headquarters concerning the splendid kidnapcase record of the U. S. Bureau of Investigation (TIME, Aug. 5). But these calm voices were lost in the cries of shame and outrage with which the mass of U. S. editors compared native law & justice with the British variety. A dozen U. S. Senators called for new laws against crime and aliens, and New York's Mayor LaGuardia exclaimed with magnificent irrelevance: "Rather than have a Lindbergh exile himself, we will chase these punks out of the city."

British editors first buried the Lindbergh story briefly on inside pages. As soon as they caught the drift of U. S. opinion, they promoted it to front pages, began editorially looking down their noses at the U. S. "The shock millions of Americans received when they read the news of Lindbergh's departure," pontificated the London Daily Herald, "is comparable only to what would occur in Britain should the Prince of Wales announce he was no longer secure in his own country."

Berlin's Deutsche Allgemeine Zeitung led off the German chorus with: "We as Germans are unable to conceive that a civilized nation. . . ."

Jibed Madrid's Sol: "Nowhere have the police and judicial organizations given more manifest proof of impotence than in the U. S." Paris' Jour informed its readers that U. S. law "has proved insufficient to protect against gangsters men whose glory shines upon their country."

Only European observer to pipe another tune was Columnist George de la Fouchardiere of Paris' Oeuvre: "It reminds one somewhat of the frog who dived into the pond to avoid getting wet in the rain. . . . Our gangster industry is extremely flourishing. . . . Nor are children any more secure here than in the U. S. ... It may be that citizens of the U. S. are in some measure worthy descendants of convicts deported from England, but inhabitants of old Europe are also worthy descendants of the heroic bandits of the Middle Ages."

Author, Producer, Patriot, As every limelight-lover knows, any great public sensation may be readily capitalized for some personal publicity. Last week mellow Author Christopher Morley got his name in the papers by remarking over the radio: "We have seen only a few days ago, in a crowning humiliation, an example of publicity's cruel power. People can be killed with photographs as surely as with guns."

In an open letter to the New York Times, Producer Winthrop Ames pledged himself never again to buy a newspaper which revealed Colonel Lindbergh's whereabouts without his permission, asked: "Who will join me in this pledge?"

Dr. John F. ("Jafsie") Condon sent the Times a long screed which spoke of "the anguish of Mrs. Anne Morrow Lindbergh, in the throes of blessed motherhood," called the kidnapping of "our beloved 'Eaglet' " the "greatest and most disastrous case of all times, excepting the Crucifixion of the devine Son of Man," and reached its climax in: "Yes, but the ashes of the darling baby, victim of a fiend urged by greed of gain, and seeking pleasure, are mute witnesses of the Crime, while within every American's breast there is a beating of the heart, tolling the death-knell of every gangster, while the Stars and Stripes fly from every staff and masthead."

Hoffman. Having caught their breath and tired of beating the dead horse of U. S. lawlessness, U. S. editors began looking for a personal Herod to blame for the Lindbergh exile. Most of the editorial pack first turned on plump, young Governor Hoffman, suspected of putting his foot in the Hauptmann case for reasons of politics and publicity. The Newark (N. J.) Evening News flayed him for "appalling meddling." The St. Louis Post-Dispatch declared that even if he were "guiltless of playing politics ... he has at least affronted the elementary proprieties." The Boston Herald snarled at "the brazenly publicized doubts of New Jersey's unseeing, unperceiving Governor."

Neither running fox nor fighting badger, Governor Hoffman proved poor sport. After conceding that the Lindberghs "must have had sufficient reasons for their act," he refused the Press everything but a cheery "No comment." At week's end he declared: "I probably would say something if Colonel Lindbergh personally attributed to me the reason for his leaving the U. S. I won't reply to second-hand passers of information." But by that time the pack were too busy snapping & snarling at each other to pay heed.

Hearst, About the time that Gossipmonger Walter Winchell, who made his reputation by predicting the birth of Charles A. Lindbergh Jr. four months in advance, was proclaiming himself "ashamed" of being a U. S. citizen, the Press at large concluded that Hero Lindbergh's real Herod was Yellow Journalism.

"Newspapers more than kidnappers," thundered the self-righteous Christian Science Monitor, "have exiled the Lindberghs. . . . Unless one has been besieged in his home, has had his life endangered on scores of landing fields, has had every move even on his wedding trip watched by news spies, has been forced to his wits' end to circumvent photographers who honor no plea for a second son after one feels the first has had 'the finger' put on him by undue publicity--unless one has had just a taste of Colonel Lindbergh's experience with a press that respects no law and knows no decency--it may not be possible to understand that this is a retreat after repeated defeats by unfair odds. . . ."

"Vhat have really beaten the Colonel," declared the Detroit Free Press, "are the persecutions, rowdiness and brutalities of the sensational newspapers. . . ."

Screeched the Dallas News: "The tabloid press and yellow journals whose Peeping Tom tactics have made his private life hideous have no place in self-respect-ing communities."

Virtually every editor who blazed away at his confreres cited the Englewood pic-ture-taking episode reported in the New York Times as an example of yellow journalism at its worst. As every alert editor already knew, the pictures were taken by Hearst photographers, printed in Hearst's New York American and tabloid New York Mirror, distributed by Hearst's International News Photos. But for four days not one editor dared to mention that prime fact. Meantime, asked by Reuters News Agency for his opinion of the Lindbergh flight, Publisher Hearst used it for attacks on the New Deal and aliens. Wrote he in part: "It would certainly seem that a government which is so liberal, not to say wasteful, in spending the people's money, might use some of the money for the useful and needful purpose of purging the country of the murderers, robbers, kidnappers, blackmailers, gangsters and rack- eteers which have invaded it from other lands as vermin invade a neglected house."

Three days later Publisher David Stern, a New Dealer who hates Mr. Hearst as much as Mr. Hearst hates the New Deal, slapped a two-column editorial on the front page of his New York Post under the headline: HOW HEARST HELPED DRIVE THE LINDBERGHS INTO EXILE. Quoting part of Mr. Hearst's message to Reuters, the editorial proceeded as follows: "What Hearst Did Not Reveal":

1) The photographs of Jon Lindbergh were taken by Hearstlings, printed in Hearstpapers. "And Hearst talks of ver-min!"

2) Hearst's New York Mirror is currently drumming up circulation and sympathy for Hauptmann by printing exclusively his "sloppily sentimental" autobiography. "And Hearst talks of vermin!"

3) Hearst blames the New Deal for U. S. crime, but the kidnapping of Charles Lindbergh Jr. occurred during the Hoover Administration.

4) Troublemaking Governor Hoffman is "an especial pet of Hearst." "And Hearst talks of vermin!"

Only apparent defender of the Yellow Press was the Patterson-McCormick tabloid New York Daily News, which cracked: "If the country is going to pot (which we don't think it is), it is not because Lindbergh has left us. A run-out by one harried and frightened prominent citizen does not indicate that the mass of decent people are in danger of being engulfed by the underworld."

Refugees' Reception. Cables announced that every newspaper in London was sending reporters and cameramen to meet the Lindbergh ship at Liverpool, that to guard against a possible Lindbergh dodge some journals were sending men to Cobh, Belfast and Glasgow.

Across two columns on the main news page of its Sunday edition that most stiff-necked of the world's newspapers, the London Times, spread the photograph of Jon Lindbergh.

One calm, misty evening the S. S. American Importer arrived at Liverpool, stood off the entrance to the Mersey River all night. Next morning it was raining. The dock was jampacked with newshawks, cameramen, workers, who thought they glimpsed the Lindberghs on deck, with Jon in his mother's arms. A tug warped the ship into its berth. A platoon of muttering bobbies carved a lane through the throng, stood in two rows staring into each other's faces. Charles and Anne Lindbergh, pale, came swiftly down the gangplank. A scattered, throaty cheer went up. Some of the men in rough clothes raised their caps. Anne Lindbergh smiled wanly. The day was so dark that the photographers flashed their bulbs. Jon, in his father's arms, blinked, then buried his face in the grey-plaid shoulder. The tall man and the small woman moved quickly through the sheds, popped into one of the motor cars, sped away, followed by five carloads of newshawks. In the Adelphi Hotel they went through the lobby without registering, were alone at last in their rooms.

*St. Matthew, 2:13-14: And when they were departed, behold, the angel of the Lord appeareth to Joseph in a dream, saying, Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and be thou there until I bring thce word: for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him. When he arose, he took the young child and his mother !>v night, and departed into Egypt.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.