Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1902-06-05
ANSWER OF So
L|C|TOR GENERAL
Correspondence Between Ex-Governor [. B.
Prince and Solicitor General
E. |. Bartlett.
THE OPTICS UNFAIRNESS
The Las Vegas Optic Published In Full Ex-Governor
Princes Letters but Failed 10 Publish tho Final
Answer of tho Solicitor General Of tho
Territory.

s'hWg
recent issue Of the Las Vegas Opt
contained a lengthy editorial entitled
Rlgnt to Remove from Office"
which the question of the removal c
FORMER Governor l.. Bradford Prince a
a member of the board of regents of tn
College of Agriculture and Mechani
Arts at Mesilla Park, and the appoint
ment of the Rev. w. A. Cooper to th
position by Governor Otero, is discuss
ed. 1t seems that Ex- Governor Prime,
intends to sue out a writ of quo warran
to in order to ascertain the legal as
poets of the case and to that effect ad
dressed some communications to Hon
Edward l.. Bartlett, solicitor general Of
the territory, requesting that the sale
solicitor general allow the name of the
territory to be used in the proceeding
as is necessary under the law govern.
| ing such matters. In this connection
the correspondence that passed be.
tween the two is published with the
exception of the last letter from the
solicitor general to Ex-Governor Prince
declining to allow the name of the ter
ritory to be used in the proceeding.
This letter explains Solicitor General
Bartlett's action clearly and gives his
reasons for so declining, therefore it is
published by this paper for the informa-
ton of all those taking an interest in
the matter.
Santa Fe, N. NJ, May 81, 1902.
Hon. L. Bradford Prince Santa Fe N.
NJ: Dear Sir: Your letter of the sth in
stant is received in reply to mine of the
Goth of March, in which you say "the
facts involved in the case in which we
desire to institute proceedings in the
nature of quo warranto are all matters
of public notoriety and perfectly well
known to every intelligent member Of
the communicable nevertheless In
compliance with my request you have
recapitulated the principal points, in
writing, in concise form, and verified
the same, and enclose the statement
herewith" 1t may be that "every intel
ligent member of the community" is
perfectly familiar with the facts as you
state. but am only lawyer and act
ing in an official capacity in which
matters Of public notoriety," are not
by me considered sufficient information
upon which to base official action.
f,,, f,,fa tn, 1aftop fhof
"you assume that am entirely famil-
lar with the fact that both Of the legal
points involved have been repeatedly
decided by our own courts besides in
accordance with the general principles
of law under a republican form Of gov
ernment." Your assumption in this
case Is wrong, as I am not aware that
this question has ever been presented
to, or determined by our courts. Ger
tain general questions have been deter
mined, but this exact case has never to
my knowledge been before our supreme
Or any district court.
AS to your statement that "the OBJ
ject of this proceeding has no personal
bearing and is necessary to the preser-
vation of good government in order to
restrain reckless usurpation of illegal
powers and to protect our educational
from being debased to
partisan and personal uses and made
The football of political schemers," and
hat you are willing to sacrifice time
!, nd 10
rom becoming an absolute despotism
With all power concentrated in a single |
land, and used arbitrarily without lin
tation or restraint" I would say that
n my opinion, while the sentiment thus |
is noble and shows a spirit |
II self-sacrifice for the public good, |
hat must excite the admiration of all |
Who may read 1t In the public prints, |
or which it was undoubtedly prepared,
do not see what bearing 1t has upon |
,our right to have the writ Of quo |
issued in your favor, unless /
he statement of facts will justify the
anne, as the territory cannot act in
ourt upon either matters of public no.
OT1eCv, OF upon dSSeTVatlOnS OI dD-
tract right or general allegations of
ears of an absolut- despotism which |
nay Concentrate all power in a single.
and" The question presented to me Is |
urely legal one and for me to deter |
nine in the first instance whether the |
acts stated without any rhetorical per-
ifage justifies the territory in appear
ng by it's writ of quo warranto to de-
ermine the title to the position Of re-
ent of the New Mexico College Of
agriculture and Mechanic Arts, and a
areful examination of your Statement
t factsn-as well as of the records In
he office of the secretary Of the terri
Dry. convince me that there is no
ause for the issuance Of such writ,
nd If issued the courts will have to
eny the same. For these reasons, I
rust respectfully decline the name Of
ne territory to be used in your behalf.
Very respectfully,
EDWARD L. BARTLETT,
Solicitor General.
An Indian X3llnd hv 4 Tradar.