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 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.