The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1934-09-26
MORATORIUM FAILED
TO PROTECT II IN
bURLE|CH ACTIONS
Facts Show State Of North Oa-
kota Was Chief Offender
in Foreclosures
REDUCED BUT DIDN'T STOP
Not One Case on Record Since
Governor Olson Took OF
flee July ~
REDUCED BUT DIDN'T sT0I

Proclamation Of Z moratorium On
foreclosures In North Dakota has re-
duced but has not eliminated FORE
closures on either farm o., city real
estate.
A factual test Of the efficacy Of the
moratorium, as revealed by the rec
ords In the Burleigh county regis
ter's office discloses TINT in Il cases
the gubernatorial PROCLAMATION which
was supposed to make everyone
safe in the enjoyment Of his farm
or city home did not operate.
Other facts come to light, too,
for anyone who takes the trouble to
leaf through the registers book
wherein are recorded foreclosure &C
tons. Chief among these Is the fact
that the state Of North Dakota, itself
has been the chief offender against
the integrity Of the moratorium pro-
claimed by William LANCER - gov
ernor.
Not one foreclosure action has been
commenced In Burleigh county since
o. H. Olson became governor on
July II.
During the year preceding the
declaration Of the moratorium, that
Is, from March I, 1882, to March I,
1898, 90 foreclosures were had In Bur
leigh county, Of which 90 were on
farm property and = On city lots.
Principally Farm Foreclosures
OF the Il foreclosures since the
moratorium became effective, Il
were by court action and Is By
advertisement. Not one Of the latter
foreclosures was on city property. All
Of them were on farm real estate.
The nature Of the foreclosures by
court action is not disclosed by the
records on the books OF the clerk Of
court, where they are most readily
available, but indications are that
many Of them were on city property.
OF the Is foreclosures listed since
the moratorium became effective,
four have been made BY the Bank Of
North Dakota; 81 by the state de-
partment Of school lands and only
one by q private mortgage.
Explanation Is made by the Bank
Of North Dakota that no foreclosures
were made by 1t where landholders
objected. The claim u made by the
state land department that its FORE
closures were made under the same
conditions and that many Of them
were to clear title 20 the landowner
could obtain q loan from the federal
land bank for refinancing purposes.
Taxes Furnish Reason
There easily may be other reasons
Why public agencies would be more
anxious to foreclose than Is true with
private mortgages. It relates to
taxes.
Under the law, taxes on property
r.ust be paid before title can be
transferred and in each case where
foreclosure IS had the mortgage
hopes to sell the land at some subse-
uuent date. In the case Of private
individual 1t doesn't make much dif-
ference. As long Is the land re-
mains In private hands the taxes
must be paid. There Is no advant-
age In foreclosing.
But when the Bank Of North Da-
kcta or the land department fore
closes the taxes stop as soon Is It
obtains title. It may be hard on
other landowners in the district,
since their taxes then 60 up. but It
makes for 4 better showing on the
books Of the land department or
Bank Of North Dakota and reduces
CONTINUED on Page Twol