Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1907-06-29

p m, This fact ana the falseness Oh
the entire statement can he estah-
| lshed. If necessary.
That this statement on q mar With
the entire article referlNa fo and with
the representations Of tAe New Mexi-
can and its correspondent concerning
the Trelford affair is appaeent to all
knowing the facts but doNhtless we
would ask too much Of the New Mex
lean I'M requesting any adhersncc to
the truth in this or other Matters
and this would certainly appear to he
the case Judging from the example
set by the senior editor of that paper
I'm acting out the lies necessary to the
successful defrauding Of Santa We
county to the tune of about Sl,2ON
the amount up to date, which was
done in the case of Max Frost. sub
stituted plaintiff, VS.. the county OF
Santa Fe and who then chooses tc
stand upon the technical objection
that the county has had its day Ia
court and cannot raise legal objec-
tlons for the purpose of retaining his
ill-gotten gains after exposure of the
fraud was produced by the under
signed
Aside from the foregoing, | do not
propose to be sidcuaeked 10y personal
attacks upon me and viii not engage
i'm further discussion I'm that respect
but to the end that the public may
know the truth of the matter ana the
gross injustice attempted by the gang
with Mr. Trelford as victim, | would
request Mr., Prichard to come from be-
hind his barricade of vituperation and
his defense "according 10 the attor-
ney generals own language to a rep-
regentatiVc of the New Mexican. Mis-
statements. prevariCations and lies -
and answer few Of the following
pertinent questions;
First-What became Of the several
objections interposed a. the opening
OF the case and which should appear
on pages 1 and of the official rec
ord2
Second-What became Of the heated
statements by the attorney general
concerning the convict Caldwell,
which statements showed the bias aud
feeling of the attorney general in the
matter Of the investga ton?
These are only two Instances of the
shaping of the record IN the manner
Of and were not 'imma-
terial matters offered by the defense,
offer to prove that Mr. Prichard, on
many occasions, instructed the witness
not to answer the question and di-
rected the official stenographer not to /
include the answer, If made, In the
record. This occurred times too nu-
merous to mention. Would it notI
have been far better to let the record
show these facts with the character Of |
he objection or were they danger |
lus and possibly explanatory of things |
better to be clouded?
As to the matter Of Mr. Prichard's |
to control the record. ! beg I
20 say that | have other evidence |
han my own statement 10 prove my I
'harge in that respect and that Stem I
Dgrapher Johnson's record contains |
he following remarkable statement |
ly Mr.. Prichard:
81 shall control this examination T
md suit myself" and that therefore, t
his disposition in the matter was
hoWn at least two occasions su4CepU-
Die of positive proof.
In closing. I submit that the answer
o tho foregoing specific charges Is
not contained in loud and excited cries
" liar. slanderer, etc., or in the i'm
charge that the writer has
an unbalanced mind'' and his state
nents and charges are unworthy OF
loticc"
Yours truly
r. II. HANNA.