To say little or nothing in many words has always been considered the main accomplishment of diplomacy in Europe. In this sense, Carter H. Harrison is a great statesman. A reporter of our paper recently interviewed Harrison, and the detailed conversation, albeit his dexterity in avoiding all questions and refraining from giving direct, unequivocal answers--his withdrawal into an impenetrable shell--was published yesterday.

He said his character and sentiments are known; that promises prior to an election are worthless; that, if the citizens want him, they must be satisfied with such assurances as have been given by his public record, etc. With respect to the Sunday laws, he said merely that he will do his mayoral duty as he understands it, and as expediency requires.

But what are his views about that obligation? That is what one wants to know. Besides, he believes that, "in following our pleasures and entertainments, one should not arouse too much the prejudices of others". What does it mean? If there is any sense to such a statement (maybe it is not meant to be sensible), then it can only signify that the German-speaking citizens, in cele-brating Sunday, must not offend too much the "notions"of pious, church-frequenting Americans. That would be very satisfying to the Citizens League: To the question as to whether he is a temperance sympathiser, the following explanation was given-that he is moderate in every respect, and consumes wine and beer accordingly. But, in the question, the personal element was not the issue. The intent of the query was to find out whether he is an advocate of the doctrine t at laws should compel others to practice abstinence. The reply, therefore, is evasive. And all other answers are equally indefinite. For instance, when asked whether he would fill all public offices with Democrats, if elected, he retorted invariably with the repetitious statement that one should have confidence in him; he will act in conformance to the dictates of his conscience; the welfare of the city concerns him mostly, and no positive assertions should be 3required of him.

Whoever may be appeased thereby is indeed blessed with blind confidence. To us, the declarations are entirely inadequate. Mr. Harrison is a good citizen and respectable man; but mere goodness and honor are not enough. There are many nice people who happen to be bad musicians. We reiterate what we said recently: In his career as Member of the County Board and as a Member of Congress, Mr. Harrison had no opportunity to prove his understanding of matters pertaining to the city. And, he admits, during those five years he could give little attention to municipal affairs; it would be necessary, therefore, to acquire experience.

Mr. Harrison complains, rather unreasonably, that the Illinois Staats-Zeitung misunderstood the speech he made upon his return from Washington. We object decisively to this reproach. We did not miss a single syllable of the address, and we repeat irrevocably that his monologue was filled to overflowing with "state rights". He uttered inspired words about the glories of the several 4states. If Harrison insists that he considers the United States to be a "nation," then he obviously knew how to withhold that thought from the speech. Everything he said revolved about one point, that the Federal laws which Congress passed in the furtherance of honest elections are manifestations of atrocious tyranny and of usurpation of state rights. If that is "war democracy," then it is a replica of the Southern variety prevailing during the years 1861 to 1865. His election as mayor of Chicago would indeed be celebrated as a victory for the Rebel Democrats--and rightly so, if that speech is any criterion. And whoever does not regard this as sufficient evidence to cast the ballot for Wright rather than Harrison, should consider the following: If Harrison is elected, then he must accede to the insistent demands for boodle, for which his party fellow-members clamor. Considerably more than half of all the votes for him come from the Irish element. How modestly they will comport themselves when political rewards are at stake, no one need be told. Usually, the sons of Erin are not satisfied with demanding everything--they want more than that. And once in office, the Hibernians make all they can. It would be hopeless for Harrison to try to stop this voracious horde. The Democrat who can do that is 5yet to be discovered.

Every official holding office through the Irish vote, must remember that he believes he is leading, while actually he is being led.

The Germans in Chicago have had bad experiences in their political alliances with the Irish, and should shun repetitions of them. As long as friendly relations prevailed between the Germans and Americans, the city had a good administration. This friendliness was interrupted, however, through no fault of the Germans, and proved a detriment to the city. During the last three years, amity was restored, and this resulted in an excellent, capable, honest, and frugal management of our city affairs. The continuance of this condition can only be assured if the Germans and Americans combine and vote for Wright, just as they did for Heath two and three years ago.

A reporter of the Illinois Staats-Zeitung interviewed Mr. Wright, and we are publishing on the fourth page of today's issue all the questions concerning 6which a mayor can be expected to express his clear, unmistakable views: city finances, construction of sewers, street illumination, harbor improvements, the temperance question, saloon licenses, and other items mentioned by our reporter. Mr. Wright spoke openly, unreservedly.

The reader who cares to be informed about the intentions, views, and personal opinions of Mr. Wright will find that an ample opportunity has thus been provided.