Albuquerque morning journal. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1903-1926, 1922-10-28
ANOTHER LETTER AND AN ANSWER

The publication, in The Morning Jour-
nal and other newspapers yesterday, OF
what purports to be a facsimile of letter
written by Captain Muller on official
business, throws new light on the candi-
date for the office of Commissioner of
Public Lands.
When the advertisement was submitted
to The Morning Journal every effort was
made to verify the validity of the letter.
In Justice to Captain Muller let it be said
that he denies ever having written it. To
any fair minded person there can be no
question as to its validity, especially when
compared with other letters written by
Captain Muller. The public is entitled to
more than a mere denial The subject Of
the letter was official business. Then
whose interests were to be served by
postponing the transaction until after
election? Why should the records of the
state land office be falsified by making
an entry 'in someone else's name?" And
who is the "old fool' from whom it was
designed--and desirable-to conceal all
knowledge of the transaction? These are
questions which Captain Muller alone can
answer and he will do we'll to answer
them.
That Captain Muller could have been
the author of such letter; that he had
any occasion in the conduct of his public
office and in the exercise of his public
trust to write such letter, must be
leenly disappointing to the many people
throughout the state who had the utmost
confidence in his honesty and ability
Certainly no one is more conversant with
the affairs of the state land office and
the matters which come under its juris-
diction than Captain Muller. His opponent
in the present campaign, Justiniano Baca
lacks both the knowledge and the expert
ence which are essential to an efficient
administration of the public lands. These
are important facts and they make the
incident all the more regrettable, mas
much as they have a direct bearing on
the public welfare.
The Morning Journal has praised Cap
tain Muller. Like the public whom he
has served, we had every confidence in
him. But we are not concerned with
mere party labels. Our first duty is to
the reading public whom we serve. 1t is
too often true that the voters are called
upon to choose between the lesser of the
two evils, with nothing more to guide their
Judgment than the public utterances of
the candidates. For that reason we well
come any information which will enable
voters to select their public officials
solely on their merits and not solely on
account of their party affiiation. It
is as true of political parties as it is of
individuals,-they are neither all good
nor all bad. If people have any hope of
correcting the conditions of which they
complain, it will be found only in putting
the general welfare above selfish inter-
ests and in the careful selection of candi-
dates regardless of their party label.
If, therefore, Captain Muller wrote the
letter that is attributed to him, he is
unfit for the office of Public Land Com
missioner. The burden of proof, it seems
to us, is on Captain Muller, to prove that
the letter is a fabrication. And if it is
genuine, Captain Muller has forfeited his
claim to public confidence. On the other
hand, the Democrats, who have made the
letter public, owe it to the public and to
Captain Muller, to substantiate it's gem
uneness.