The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1933-11-18
WOMAN OFFICIAL IS
FACING CHARGE OF
EMbEZZL|NC FUNDS
Ward County Register Of Deeds
Accused Of Keeping Fees
From Office
EXAMINER RoUnDLY SCORED
Special Investigator Says In.
spector Failed to Report
Facts in Case

and the other failing to charge and
account for official fees, were served
Saturday upon Miss Nell Rose, Ward
county register of deeds. the two ac-
lions being an outgrowth Of an audit
IT her office by o. r. Void Of Minot.
Who signed the complaints.
Void, under date Of November II.
forwarded a report Of his audit to
Governor william LANCER. at whose
direction Void had undertaken the
audit In the capacity Of deputy bank
examiner.
Void, In his audit, prepared a re-
port on fees which the register COL
lected for making cllattel abstracts,
and the report says they were not
RENTED to the county treasurer. but
retained by her. Under section 35ll
compiled laws for North Dakota,
these fees should have been RENTED
to the county treasurer with other
fees collected"
It is In connection with these trans
actions that the charge Of falling to
charge and account for official fees is
brought, the specific allegation being
that the register, during the month Of
December. 1882. made chattel alb
stracts for and collected from the
Minot Credit company the sum Of
Takes Rap 1t Engeseth
Vold's report also says:
Deputy Examiner M. ]. Engeseth
checked this office lregister Of deeds)
IN January l6, 1888. In his report to
me department he reports everything
regular in the office of the register
If deeds and shows on his report that
ail fees have been RENTED to the
county treasurer. This Is not true.
At the time Of his examination the
register Of deeds had not RENTED the
lees collected for the months Of Sep
tember, October, November and De-
cember. 1882, In the total sum of ST.
lit. These were the regular record.
ing fees and the fees for making of
chattel abstracts as mentioned in this
report. Mr. Engescth could not help
out note this fact when the examina-
ton WAS made with the system of ac-
counting used"
The cnbezzlement complaint alleges
that the register. IN November, 1882,
then and there being under legal
duty to deposit with and pay said
fees In the sum Of 1868 to the county
treasurer Of Ward county, did will
fully, unlawfully and feloniously con-
vert the said fees. being the said sum
Of 1868, to her own use"
Vold's audit showed, however, that
the register at the present time has
accounted to the county treasurer for
all fees collected by her. except the
chattel abstract fees.
Void In his audit report says:
Collections Are Admitted
In checking the monthly reports OF
fees collected by the register Of deeds.
tnd which We're filed in the county
auditors office, find that Nell Rose,
the register. has not at any time dur
Ing the past five or six years paid
over these fees (chattel abstract) to
the Ward county treasurer. On the
contrary. she admits that all fees col
lected for making Of chattel abstracts
have been retained by her. The only
reason for so doing, she states. Is that
she presumed that those fees belonged
~ her. inasmuch as the abstractors had
a right to charge for such work. She
figures that she was taking the same
position as q private abstracting con-
Germ. She also admits she never had
cny legal advice on the matter to
back up her contention"
The report lists payments which
Void says the Minot Credit company
reported to him 1t had made to the
register over period or five or six
years for chattel abstracts, the total
being 3679.75.
Miss Rose stated that she only
charged one-half Of what the law re-
CURED her to charge" the report con-
:lnues. Therefore the charges should
have been 81 $3.50 instead Of 3679.75.
Minot Credit company estimates that
they paid her another $500 prior to
the year 1880, whereas the total
charges to the abovs firm will reach
$4,000.
The report also lists several other
firms for which Void said Miss Rose
reported she had made abstracts.