Iditarod pioneer., 1914-09-26
MRS. MOSES
 NOT GUILTY

In Commissioner Albrechs court on Tuesday and "Wednesday of this week the unique spectacle was presented of woman on trial for the crime of gambling. The case was that of the United States versus Matilda NJ Moses, and the complaint al legged that the defendant on September b last at Discovery, Otter, participated in game of poker "for money or other valua hle consideration" The case was one of unusual interest, on account of the ques tions of law brought into it, and also be- cause of the fact that it developed that the general sentiment of the community, as brought out in the examination of jurors, is unanimously opposed to professional gam bling but inclined to wink at what was de nominated social game or one in which there was no 'rake-otf' or percentage against the players.
 After the complaint was read to the de- fendant. and before she pleaded to the same, her attorney, w. F. Harrison, moved that the information be quashed and the warrant set aside on the ground that the information was not such as was contem- plated by the laws of Alaska, and that the case was against the constitution of the United States
 Defective information Alleged
 The information was sworn to by Deputy Marshal ConEn, and was to the effect that he had been informed and believed and therefore alleged, that Mrs, Moses had done certain acts (detailing them constituting the crime of gambling, and the contention of the attorney for the defendant was that the information, under the code, must be sworn to by some person with a personal knowledge of the facts, or If sworn to on information, should be backed up by the affidavit or deposition of some person con yersant with the facts. MT. Harrison con tended that an affidavit sworn to upon ln- formation and belief was not verified by oath as contemplated by the statute, the information so sworn to being only the sworn opinion of the athant.
 He further contended that the issuing ct warrants upon such an information was blow at the very foundation of the liberty given to the citizens of the United States under the constitution, which provides that "the right of the people to be secure Tn their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue but upon probable cause supported by oath or affirmation and particularly de scribing the place to be searched and the persons or things to be seized'
 Authorities were read showing that many was not sufficient, among others a decision courts had held that such an information of the supreme court of California, that "the liberty of a citizen cannot be violated upon the mere expression of an opinion under oath that he is guilty of crime"
 
 contended that the information was suffi- cient, and that an information sworn to on information sworn to on information and information and belief was all that was re- quired by the Alaska code and read a de- cision of the supreme court of Oregon as upholding his position.
 Defendants attorney contended that the case cited by Mir. Taylor referred to prose cutons under the license law only, and Tn turn cited an Alaska decision on the ques- ton brought up in this case, in which the district court held that the objection was made too late, having been made after the defendant had given bond for appearance, and intimating that had the objection been made in time it would have prevailed
 The court overruled the notion of the attorney for the defendant.
 Defendant Unconcerned
 During the argument of counsel the de- fendant sat nonchalantly munchlng sweet meats and peruslng magazine, apparently but little concerned in the subject under discussion. She is not stranger Tn the commissioners court, having been before that tribunal at different times both as defendant and witness After Major Al brecht had ruled upon the point of law