Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1920-12-02
EXAMINATION OF
N. D.. BANK WOULD
CLEAR UP MATTER
OF Amount of Money Rede-
posted in Other. Banks
Rumors of Money Loaned
to League Banks and Used
For Political Purposes.


Fargo, Nov. 2S.-If the examina-
ton Of the bank of North Dakota is
! made Oh December 2, as is possible
under the initiated laws, the amouat
of. money re-deposited in the bank
of the state will soon be known. The
last official statement of the Bank of
North Dakota, shows about S15.-
OO0,0 on deposit and only S1s mil
lions, redeposited in the other banks.
Some five or six million dollars are
permanently invested in other Sc
lurities which cannot be realized on
for a long time. Favored banks
with large re-deposits from the state
bank may be embarrassed il called
upon to return the cash> One Fargo
bank is said to have had .$350,000
of state funds, while all other Far
60 banks have only had about $780,
900 of state funds.
The League banks should have
nothing fear from withdrawal Of
the funds, neither the banks that
have no deposits. To what extent
the League banks have financed
schemes of the leaders of the Non
partisan League is not yet known.
It is rumored that money for politi-
cal purposes and political policies
has been secured on notes of indivi-
duals, even to the extent of aiding
certain newspaper plants and other
projects. What the real value Of
the securities is remains to be learn
ed. The re-deposits in western banks
of the state are now said to be much
less than has been supposed, and the
counties in that part of the state,
have more money in the banks If
North Dakota than has been re-de-
posted i'm the banks. So far the
bank of North Dakota has not fur
nished statement to the public Of
the amounts re-deposited in the state
In October a statement on what
was taken to be Authority Of parties
who should know, WAS 7made con-
corning the amounts re-deposited in
the three congressional districts Of
the state, which was to the effect
that there was mare money in the
state bank from the first >district
than had been re-deposited in that
district; that there WAS about $780,
900 more re-deposited lin the banks
of the second district than the coun-.
ties had sent to the state bank, and
d much larger sum Ee-deposited in
the banks of the third district than
sent to the Bank of North Dakota
from that district
Just what truth there was in this
statement is not known, sbut on Nov.
% statement WAS issuad from the
Bank of North Dakota at Bismarck
by a.. Johannsen, director of the au-
dts department showing an entire
ly different distribution fof public
funds, deposited with the Bank Of
North Dakota and re-deposits by the
bank. His statement shows that IN
the First congressional district there
is only s769,162 less on readeposit
than is on deposit with the Bank of
North Dakota, and it shows that the
Second district has on re-deposit
$664,246 less than officers have de-
posted with the state bank. The
Third district is represented aas hav-
ing an excess of $l,193,566. Mr..
Johannsen's statement says that the
Bank Of North Dakota has ON ,re-de-
posit $10,921,417 with local banks.
Commenting on the Bank Of
North Dakota affairs the Fargo
Forum says: +.
Public deposits, general aaA <ather
FUNDS, in the Bank of North Dakota,
$11,559,039.01 on Nov.
is, while the sinking funds on de-
posit totaled $s,365,54s.e6. sIndivi-
hal deposits were $214.s26.s3,
While reserves Of ;depositinE banks
N deposit with the state bank were
AS against these total deposits Of
the banks state
neat; discipses liquid assets Of $11,-
'41,s6s.oe. leaving spread Of
Ibout IS, ,0O0, ,0oV. which fis repre-