On the record
In the larger field of action he had displayed a timid, vacillating character, and the boldest leaders of his party felt that in the final test as a candidate he lost because he hesitated.
Source
gutenberg.orgEditor's note · Context
Alexander critiques a political figure's indecisiveness, suggesting it led to their failure in a critical moment.
Share
More from De Alexander
He used to get angry with men simply because they voted against him on questions in which he took an interest.
He set the custom of dictating bills in chancery to an amanuensis, doing it with such accuracy that a word had seldom to be changed.
Its attitude was strong, defiant, and its only purpose apparently was to create a public sentiment hostile to the extension of slavery.
Thoughtful men who were not in any sense political partisans gave careful heed to his words.
Other voices in this conversation
