Newspaper reaction in the United States was, for the most part, harsh and censorious. The lead editorial in the August 28 issue of the New York Times said flatly did desert his post. The Times argued a strong President should face and overcome the several obstacles of which complained or go down fighting. Certainly he should not quit. There is no escaping the conclusion, this editorial said, that Janio has done his country a grave disfavor. None of the editorials available this writer were favorably impressed by the language of idealism in which Quadros' statement was couched. Writers probed instead for the realistic or even the ulterior motives they felt must be buried somewhere in the deed. The Washington Post offered a declamatory editorial the next day entitled Charisma in Brazil. It divined beneath all his verbiage was seeking by a coup de theatre for a fresh popular mandate. After all, he had used such tactics before. Opined the Post: is part statesman and part thespian. Like other mass leaders, he . . . appeals as much the heart as the head. The charismatic leader anoints himself in popular acclaim and uses the craft of the stage keep politics boiling. Three days later the editorial writer of the Post was not so confident of his first judgment, but not at all hesitant about making a second one: He appears, the editorials of August 29 said, to have dealt himself out of the struggle. . . If Sr. intended his resignation as a political gambit, the evidence is he destroyed confidence in his leadership and has given his foes their biggest victory by refusing fight. The action of the President was now judged be an irresponsible abdication under pressure. Time magazine (September 1) speculated the ever emotional and sometimes erratic President Janio had engaged in a characteristically headlong performance was impulsive-but not altogether rash. Time hinted probably aspired return on his own terms and the resignation was calculated recklessness. In an August 29 editorial focused on another subject, but for which the affair was deemed illustrative, the Chicago Tribune favored what it called one of the guesses which has gained currency-that the neurotic Quadros had resigned whip up sentiment would return him office with a 'mandate' run a oneman show. Other editorial sources were less disposed judge Quadros' motives, but they were clear on the important implications of his act. Newsweek offered a picture captioned, I must respect my conscience, but the accompanying article offered nothing on the moral meaning of the statement of resigna-