U.S. MINISTER IN AUSTRALIA

Press, Volume LXXIX, Issue 23843, 12 January 1943, Page 4

U.S. MINISTER IN AUSTRALIA

QUALIFICATIONS OF POLITICIAN WIDESPREAD NEWSPAPER CRITICISM (Rcc. 10.30 p.m.) NEW YORK, Jan. 10. The “New York Daily Mirror” says that Mr Edward J. Flynn, who announced his resignation as chairman of the National Democratic Committee to become Mr Roosevelt’s ambassador and personal representative as Minister Plenipotentiary in Australia, refused to discuss the widespread criticism of his appointment to Australia and said that the whole situation would be cleared up on Monday in Washington, after which he would make a statement. The “Daily Mirror” in a leading article says the full story of the paving block case has now been cabled to Australia, hence Australians are wondering why a Minister Plenipotentiary to that groat, friendly, and strategically vital country should not be “like Caesar’s wife, above suspicion.” “We think the people of Australia deserve something better. The appointment is implicit with offence to a great ally. “Wherever you land in Australia, Mr Flynn, you will stumble over one of those paving blocks,” concludes the newspaper. The “New York Times” in a leading article says American prestige abroad and morale at home would be harmed by Mr Flynn’s appointment. "We prefer not to believe that Mr Flynn has been definitely and irrevocably offered the post until the President himself confirms the fact, in which case the Senate's only proper course and action will be to reject the appointment,” adds the newspaper. The “Washington Post” in a loading article says Mr Flynn is as well qualified for a diplomatic commission as a butcher in an operating room. Our relations with Australia are of such great importance that the Senate is not likely to accept a discredited politician, even if the President has the nerve to make the appointment. Our stalwart ally “down under” is certainly entitled to more thoughtful consideration. The Washington “Star Post” says a Minister to Australia has an unusually important and difficult task at present and Mr Nelson Johnson’s successor ought to be chosen solely on the basis of qualifications. A diplomatist should be preferable to a career man.