Each political party accuses the "opposing candidate" of refusing to
answer certain questions which somebody has chosen to ask him. I think
myself it is discreditable for a candidate to answer any questions at
all, to make speeches, declare his policy, or to do anything whatever
to get himself elected. If a political party choose to nominate a man so
obscure that his character and his views on all public questions are
not known or inferable he ought to have the dignity to refuse to expound
them. As to the strife for office being a pursuit worthy of a noble
ambition, I do not think so; nor shall I believe that many do think so
until the term "office seeker" carries a less opprobrious meaning
and the dictum that "the office should seek the man, not the man the
office," has a narrower currency among all manner of persons. That by
acts and words generally felt to be discreditable a man may evoke great
popular enthusiasm is not at all surprising. The late Mr. Barnum was not
the first nor the last to observe that the people love to be humbugged.
They love an impostor and a scamp, and the best service that you can do
for a candidate for high political preferment is to prove him a little
better than a thief, but not quite so good as a thug.