Amelia Earhart (19 page)

Mantz never explained to Eleanor Roosevelt, or anyone else, why he wanted the logs. He did explain, however, that when he requested the logs from the Coast Guard he was informed that “the official report could not be released except through certain channels.” It was discovered that the Roosevelt administration had prohibited the release of the radio logs and other pertinent information as it pertained to the Earhart disappearance. A further truth is that many of the government materials related to the disappearance of Amelia Earhart are still classified top secret at this writing.

Mantz, well aware that Earhart and Eleanor Roosevelt were good friends, held out the hope that the first lady would be helpful in his quest to obtain the transmissions. Unsure of what to do, Mrs. Roosevelt forwarded Mantz's letter to Henry Morgenthau on May 10. Attached to the missive was a letter from the first lady on White House stationery that stated in part, “Now comes this letter. . . . I don't know whether you can send this man these records, but in any case, I am sending you the letter and let me know whatever your decision may be.” The note was signed, “Affectionately, E. R.” The tone of Mrs. Roosevelt's note affirmed Mantz's suspicion that an element of secrecy was involved relative to the Earhart disappearance.

On the morning of May 13, Morgenthau called Mrs. Roosevelt on a White House telephone to discuss the Mantz letter. The first lady was not available to take the call, and Morgenthau conversed with her secretary, Malvina Scheider, whose nickname was “Tommy.” The entire conversation between Morgenthau and Scheider, taken directly from the transcription, follows:

Hello, Tommy. How are you? This letter that Mrs. Roosevelt wrote me about trying to get the report on Amelia Earhart. Now, I've been given a verbal report. If we're going to release this, it's just going to smear the whole reputation of Amelia Earhart, and my . . . Yes, but I mean if we give it to this one man we've got to make it public; we can't let one man see it. And if we ever release the report of the
Itasca
on Amelia Earhart, any reputation she's got is gone, because—and I'd like to—I'd really like to return this to you.

Now, I know what Navy did, I know what the
Itasca
did, and I know how Amelia Earhart absolutely disregarded all orders, and if we ever release this thing, goodbye Amelia Earhart's reputation. Now, really—because if we give the access to one, we have to give it to all. And my advice is that—and if the President ever heard that somebody questioned that the Navy hadn't made the proper search, after what those boys went through—I think they searched, as I remember it, 50,000 square miles, and every one of those planes was out, and the boys just burnt themselves out physically and every other way searching for her. And if—I mean I think he'd get terribly angry if somebody—because they just went to the limit, and so did the Coast Guard. And we have the report of all those wireless messages and everything else, what that woman—happened to her the last few minutes. I hope I've just got to never make it public, I mean—O.K.—Well, still if she wants it, I'll tell her—I mean what happened. It isn't a very nice story. Well, yes. There isn't anything additional to something like that. You think up a good one. Thank you.

For reasons never explained, Malvina Scheider's responses to Morgenthau's statements were never recorded. A few minutes after speaking with Scheider, Morgenthau placed a call to Assistant Secretary Gibbons of the Treasury Department. The following conversation was found on the same Dictaphone recording:

Morgenthau: I mean we tried—people want us to search again those islands, after what we have gone through. You know the story, don't you?

Gibbons: We have evidence that the thing is all over, sure. Terrible. It would be awful to make it public.

An undated, unaddressed, and unsigned note on White House stationery was also discovered in the same Hyde Park library archives. The note, which was apparently written by Morgenthau's secretary after he had received Mantz's letter, was directed to Eleanor Roosevelt. It read:

Mr. Morgenthau says that he can't give out any more information than was given to the papers at the time of the search of Amelia Earhart. It seems they have confidential information which would absolutely ruin the reputation of Amelia Earhart and which he will tell you personally at a time when you wish to hear it.

He suggests writing this man and telling him that the President is satisfied from his information, and you are too, that everything possible was done.

On May 14, Eleanor Roosevelt wrote a letter to Paul Mantz that stated:

I have made inquiries about the search which was made for Amelia Earhart and both the President and I are satisfied that the information which we have received that everything possible was done. We are sure that a very thorough search was made.

An examination and analysis of the Morgenthau memo is warranted, perhaps necessary.

Near the beginning of the memo, where Morgenthau says he had been given a verbal report, he is likely referring to one that came from
Itasca
commander Warner K. Thompson. It is a matter of record that during the last week of July 1937, Morgenthau flew from Washington, D.C. to Hawaii. The secretary claimed the trip was a vacation, but it is known that once there, he met privately with Thompson. Clearly, the meeting involved a topic that could not be discussed over the telephone or via telegram or letter. The timing of the visit gives one reason to suspect that it had something to do with the Earhart disappearance. One can only guess at what was so important as to demand an in-person visit with a high-ranking government official and the Coast Guard commander.

Early in the conversation with Scheider, Morgenthau says, “Now I've been given a verbal report. If we're gong to release this, it's just going to smear the whole reputation of Amelia Earhart.” Clearly, Morgenthau is privy to information related to the Earhart disappearance not made available to the rest of the world, information of such a grave nature that it would damage the reputation of the aviatrix. This validates the notion that Morgenthau, close confidant of President Roosevelt, had knowledge of what happened to Earhart.

Decidedly puzzling, however, is the reference to something that would damage her reputation. What could that possibly have been? What had happened over the course of the nine months since her disappearance that would have to do with damaging her reputation? Or as has been suggested, did the government have proof of Earhart's involvement in the Tokyo Rose broadcasts? Was the government concerned that if the public learned that Earhart was on a mission to photograph Japanese mandated islands they would think less of her? It must be remembered, during those times the word “spy” had a negative connotation among Americans. On the other hand, had Earhart returned safely to the United States with important reconnaissance information, would she not be regarded as a heroine? It seems likely.

No, something else happened, something the government had knowledge of that they were concerned about, concerned that it would ruin Earhart's reputation. It remains a mystery.

Then Morgenthau makes a reference to the notion that “if we ever release the report of the
Itasca
on Amelia Earhart, any reputation she's got is gone.”

Despite all of the concern expressed in the foregoing communications, the logs of the
Itasca
were finally made available. On July 5, approximately two and a half months after receiving Paul Mantz's missive, Eleanor Roosevelt received a letter from Morgenthau stating, “We have found it possible to send to Mr. A. Paul Mantz a copy of the log of the
Itasca
, which I think will supply him with all the data he asked for in his letter of June First.” The logs of the
Itasca
were mailed to Mantz on July 21 by Rear Admiral R. R. Wesche of the U.S. Coast Guard.

This series of events raises two important questions: First, if, as Morgenthau expressed in his May 13, 1938, telephone call to Malvina Scheider, “any reputation she's got is gone” should the report of the
Itasca
on Amelia Earhart ever be released, then why would it appear to be acceptable to release the logs two and a half months later? A thorough reading of the
Itasca
logs reveals nothing that could damage the reputation of the aviatrix.

The second question that must then be asked is: Were the logs that were released to Mantz the original logs of the Coast Guard vessel, or had they been tampered with? Had passages been deleted? Evidence has surfaced to support the latter contention (chapter 25, “The Mystery of the
Itasca
Logs”).

There is a time period between 8:03 a.m. and 8:43 a.m. (Howland Island time) in the
Itasca
logs that shows no transmissions or receptions. This is just before communications ceased altogether, leading the Coast Guard to announce that the Electra had crashed into the Pacific Ocean. Some researchers who have examined the logs are of the opinion that entries during the aforementioned time period were deleted. Some have also suggested that it might have been these same deleted communications that Morgenthau and Thompson discussed in Hawaii during the last week of July 1937. One must wonder whether Morgenthau's comment “what that woman—happened to her the last few minutes” had anything to do with the missing portion of the log. Or did Morgenthau have a hand in determining which portions of the log needed to be deleted?

Regarding the lack of log entries between 8:03 a.m. and 8:43 a.m., it must be remembered that the government explanation was related to the notion that Earhart was lost and was low on fuel. It does not make sense that a pilot in that kind of situation would cease communications with a source that had the potential to direct her to a safe landing area.

Another statement by Morgenthau invites attention. He said, “I know how Amelia Earhart absolutely disregarded all orders, and if we ever release this thing, goodbye Amelia Earhart's reputation.” Whose orders did Earhart disregard? Here is a government official, the secretary of the treasury, referring to Earhart's disregard of orders. There can be no question that Earhart was under orders from the United States government. What could she have been ordered to do? There exists abundant evidence to suggest that Earhart was intended to fly over selected Japanese mandated islands and photograph suspected military installations and buildup. Was this something she agreed to do voluntarily, or was she “ordered” to do so? Would a private citizen be subjected to military or government orders? On the other hand, if the federal government had, in fact, subsidized and facilitated Earhart's around-the-world flight as has been suggested, could she have been placed in a position of agreeing to cooperate with the military on a spy mission? It appears to be the only conceivable conclusion.

Then there is Morgenthau's cryptic comment: “what that woman—happened to her the last few minutes, I hope—I've just got to never make it public.” Twelve words later, Morgenthau stated, “It isn't a very nice story.”

What does “the last few minutes” mean? Is it a reference to the last few minutes the Electra was in the air before coming down or being forced down? Could it be a reference to the last few minutes of Earhart's life? The last few minutes before she and Noonan were captured by the Japanese? What? Why would Morgenthau hope he would never have to make it public, why isn't it “a very nice story?” What horrible thing could have occurred to have generated comments such as these?

If the truth had come out relative to Earhart's reconnaissance mission, that it was backed by the U.S. government with the blessings of President Roosevelt and Secretary of the Treasury Morgenthau, it would have proved embarrassing. It would have had the appearance of the president subjecting a civilian to a dangerous, some would have said reckless, mission wherein her personal safety was at high risk. This could have had a serious impact on Roosevelt's reputation and could have endangered his chances to be elected for a second term. Politicians are far more concerned with their legacy than they are with the truth; it was as true then as it is now.

In spite of ongoing rumors that Earhart was alive and a prisoner of the Japanese, George P. Putnam had her declared dead on January 9, 1939, eighteen months after her disappearance. This is dramatically in contrast to tradition and law, which mandates the passage of seven years before such a determination is made in the absence of a body. Fred Noonan's wife of only a few weeks also had him declared dead.

In a letter dated March 15, 1991, Hawaii senator Daniel Akaka requested pertinent Earhart materials from Secretary of the Treasury Nicholas F. Brady. In part, Akaka's letter states:

I would like to request that your department retrieve from your files, wherever they may be, all classified information concerning Miss Earhart's last flight. When this information has been assembled, please contact my office so that I may make arrangements for its review.

Akaka even listed the precise reference numbers of said materials and where they could be located in the Treasury Department's storage facility. Secretary Brady held the letter for ten days before finally acting on it. He then sent Akaka a memo stating that the “Morgenthau files have been sent to the National Archives.” It is interesting, and perhaps telling, that the Earhart materials were referred to as the “Morgenthau files.” Since then, though often searched for, the so-called Morgenthau files have never been located. This represents one more example of the government's refusal to cooperate with anyone interested in researching what happened to Amelia Earhart. It is also another mysterious disappearance of materials related to the Earhart case.

If there were no government involvement, and if there were no deception, and if there were no reason to suspect that clandestine, and perhaps illegal, activities were involved, then why would the federal government classify all of the related documents as top secret and refuse to allow honest and curious Earhart researchers to examine them, to search for and make determinations relative to the truth?