[ G.R. No. 1468. March 14, 1904 ] 3 Phil. 398
[ G.R. No. 1468. March 14, 1904 ]
THE UNITED STATES, COMPLAINANT AND APPELLEE, VS. ALONSO P. GARDNER, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT. D E C I S I O N
TORRES, J.:
On January 20, 1903, the prosecuting attorney of the city of Manila filed an information in the Court of First Instance of that city charging the three defendants with the crime of the falsification of notes or documents equivalent to current money payable to bearer, in that on or about the 16th day of January, 1903, the said defendants, Gardner, Jameson, and Kilp, in the city of Manila, Philippine Islands, willfully, feloniously, and with intent to gain, forged two notes or documents which passed as current money under the laws of these Islands, with the intent of circulating them, and forged and attempted to make an imitation of two United States silver certificates of the value of $10 each, money of the United States, altering and changing the numbers, seals, letters, and inscriptions on two $1 United States silver certificates which pass as current money in the Philippine Islands, in order that they might appear on the face as of the value of flO each; this contrary to the statute in the case made and provided.
After the complaint was filed and before the trial commenced, at the request of the prosecuting attorney the case was dismissed with respect to the defendants Jameson and Kilp under the provisions of section 34 of General Orders, No. 58, and they were accordingly discharged, the prosecution being continued solely against Alonso P. Gardner.
From the testimony taken at the trial, it appears that on January 16,1903, while the accused, Gardner and James Jameson, were in the “Soldiers’ Institute” situated in Santa Cruz, this city, Gardner ordered Jameson to go to a bookstore in front of the post-office to buy a bottle of mucilage and a blue pencil, and for that purpose gave him half a dollar. This was about half past 3 in the afternoon. Jameson got the mucilage and the pencil, Gardner not having told him for what he wanted them. As a witness Jameson identified one of the blue pencils which was shown him at the trial. Jameson’s testimony is corroborated by 8. A. Presby, the owner of the Manila Stationery Company, who identified the witness Jameson, as also the pencil and a bottle of mucilage, which were exhibited to him as those which he had sold to Jameson between 1 o’clock and 2.30 that afternoon. Between 6 and 7 o’clock that night the witness Jameson, at the invitation of the accused, went by tram car to the Malate barracks, where they found a soldier, tamed William, with whom the accused had some conversation. They then left the barracks, and while passing by a tailor shop Gardner handed Jameson a bill asking him to change it for silver and promised to give him half its value. Jameson drew Gardner’s attention to the fact that the bill was not good, to which Gardner replied that he knew that, and that he had made it with mucilage, saying to Jameson, “Go along, get it changed, and I will give you half.” Jameson cashed the bill and received 25 pesos for it and then went up to the Soldiers’ Institute, where he found Gardner. This witness described the bill which was so exchanged by him, together with the alteration which had been made in it, and identified the bill which was exhibited to him at the trial as the one which he had given to the Chinese tailor, numbered 54226499, and testified that this bill had been given him by the defendant Gardner, in whose possession he had also seen some Confederate bills. The silver certificate identified by this witness appears on page 91 of the record.
Jameson also testified that when he delivered to Gardner the money obtained by changing the note the latter gave him $7 or $8, and that Gardner at that time had another bill on which he had pasted a number “10” very similar to the bill which he had given the witness, and that this bill remained in Gardner’s possession; that afterwards the witness Jameson and defendant Gardner went together to the town of Calamba, where the witness saw that Gardner had nine Confederate f 10 bills which he tried to pass in a Filipino drug store; at the time he tried to pass these bills there were three persons unknown to the witness in the store, one of them an American and the other two Filipinos. The Chinaman Ah Fun, resident of Xo. 32 Calle Nueva, Malate, testified that he had given 25 pesos in exchange for an American bill upon which the number 10 had been pasted; that he did not observe this defect in the bill at first, as it was dark, but observed it very shortly afterwards and immediately went to the police station to complain. This witness identified the bill numbered 54226499 as the one which had been delivered to him by James Jameson, and testified that the latter told him it was a ten-dollar bill.
The witness William F. Kilp testified that he was with Gardner one Saturday night, the date of which he does not remember, in a house of prostitution in Sampaloc and that while in this house the witness attempted to pass a bill which he had received from the accused while they were together in the Soldiers’ Institute a short time before; that he handed this bill to the owner of the house No. 106, that the woman shortly after returned it to him saying she could not change it because it was bad. This witness identified the bill on folio 91 of the record, numbered 36579681; he testified that after the woman returned the bill to him he handed it back to the accused who told him at the time that it was not a good bill and that he had got it from a man called Bennet; this witness also testified that he had seen some other Confederate bills in the possession of the defendant.
George W. Marshall, a detective, testified that he was in the Sampaloc station when the witness Kilp was taken there under arrest in connection with the attempt to pass a one-dollar bill raised to a ten, and identified the bill in question as that numbered 36579681, now on page 91 of the record. Jerome Patterson, a policeman, testified that he saw William P. Kilp in the house of prostitution No. 106 and that Kilp while there handed a f 10 note to the mistress of the house, who offered him 20 pesos for it; that upon this the witness asked Kilp why he accepted 20 pesos for it when a Chinaman would give him 25 for it, to which Kilp replied that the Chinaman only had 6 or 8 pesos; that shortly after the woman received the bill she came back with it and refused to keep it, and that then Kilp approached the light for the purpose of examining it as did some others who were there and also the witness; that when the witness asked Kilp where he got that bill the latter told him he got it at No. 47 Balicbalic in a Chinese house; that just at this time a stranger who was lying on a bench there said that he was present when the bill was given to Kilp; that this man was about the same size as the accused and that after Kilp was taken to the police station the witness returned and looked for the man who had been lying on the bench but could not find him.
Maria Sanchez, the keeper of the house of prostitution, identified the defendant as having been in her house with the defendant Kilp, who tried to cash a $10 American bill and said she was about to give him the change but observed on approaching the light that the number was stuck on to the bill; that she then returned it and said she would not change it because it was bad; that when Kilp was taken to the police station by Patterson, the police officer, it was found that the bill was bad; that while this was going on the defendant Gardner was sitting on a bench; this witness identified the bill numbered 36579681 as the same which had been handed her by Kilp.
Article 289 of the Penal Code provides that those who falsify bank notes or other instruments or documents payable to bearer, or coupons thereof, the issue of which has been authorized by law, or those who introduce such in the Philippine Islands, shall be punished by cadena temporal in its medium degree to cadena perpetua and a fine of from 6,250 to 62,500 pesetas.
The silver certificates in the record are documents payable to bearer or documents of credit duly issued by virtue of the federal laws in force in the United States, and are included in this article of the code as documents payable to bearer.
Each one of these certificates may be considered as paper money, the purpose of which is to take the place of cash by a representative value, the same as any other document of credit, but they can not be considered to be money as they are not a commodity having an intrinsic value as has coined money.
The falsification of bank notes and of documents of credit payable to bearer and issued by the State, to which class the two certificates in question belong, is an act severely punished by the law as tending to bring such documents into discredit and because such offenses produce a lack of confidence on the part of the holders of said documents to the prejudice of the interests of society and of the State, and for this reason the law punishes this crime more severely than it does the counterfeiting of money, in consideration of the fact that it is easier to counterfeit such certificates, notes, and documents of credit payable to bearer than to make counterfeit coin, and that the profit which is derived therefrom by the forger of such documents is greater and the incentive for the commission of such a crime more powerful.
The falsification of these silver certificates was effected by pasting little pieces of paper, on each one of which the figure “10” appears, over the figure " 1," which showed the true value of the certificate, and by obliterating with a pencil the number “1” wherever it appeared on the corners or sides of the certificates for the purpose of making it appear that each one of them was worth $10 instead of |1, and by this means the sum of 25 Mexican pesos was fraudulently obtained in exchange for one of the said bills or certificates.
The accused, Alonso P. Gardner, pleaded not guilty. In his sworn testimony he stated that on the night of the 16th of January, 1903, while at supper in the Soldiers’ Institute, Jameson approached him and sat down beside him; that shortly afterwards Kilp arrived, who asked Jameson if he had any money and the latter replied affirmatively,¦placing a bill on the table and told him to take what money he wanted; that thereupon the witness picked up the bill, without noticing what it was and handed it to Kilp; that one afternoon Jameson put on a pair of trousers belonging to a man called Studemeyer and shortly after found in the pocket of these trousers three Confederate notes, and when Jameson handed the witness one of these notes in Sam pal oc, asking him if it was good, the witness looked at it and said, “No; it is not good;” that Jameson had more than two notes of this kind, from which the witness removed the numbers which had been pasted on to them; that when he went and looked for Jameson to whom he had delivered a watch for sale on the night of the 16th of that month, he found him in a Chinaman’s store changing forged notes; that Kilp also passed a forged note that night; that the witness did not know by whom these notes were forged; that on the night of the 17th the witness and Kilp were in house No. 106 in Sampaloc, where he stretched out on a bench; that shortly after a woman aroused him asking him if a bill which she had was good; that Kilp then told her that he knew to whom it belonged and the witness replied that it belonged to one Bennet; that he knew that Kilp passed the false note in Sampaloc in exchange for silver and that Jameson did the same tiling; he denied that he had received any part of the money which Jameson obtained for the false note; that on the 16th of January Jameson asked him for a peso with which to buy a bottle of mucilage, and the witness handed Jameson 30 cents, which was all the money he had; that nothing was said about buying a blue pencil; that while he was in Bilibid he endeavored to induce the said Kilp and Jameson to tell the truth and that they agreed to do so, but that only Kilp testified, and Jameson refused to do so fearing that he would be charged with perjury if he changed his testimony.
These excuses given by the defendant, Gardner, do not overcome the result of the evidence for the prosecution. The proof of the defendant’s guilt is shown beyond a reasonable doubt; that Alonso P. Gardner altered two silver certificates of the value of $1 each, for the purpose of gain, circulating and passing them as of the apparent value of $10, and that he succeeded in cashing one of them and that with respect to the other his criminal purpose was frustrated because the fact that the bill was forged was observed at the time.
The testimony of the witnesses called by the defense do not show that Gardner had nothing to do with the alterations made in these two certificates. The evidence is that the defendant bought a bottle of mucilage with which the figure “10” was stuck on a $1 note over the figure “1” and provided himself with a blue pencil with which the other figures on the certificate were obliterated; that while he was in prison he endeavored to induce the witnesses Jameson and Kilp, of whose services he availed himself for the purpose of circulating the forged notes, to testify in his favor. This circumstance corroborates the testimony for the prosecution and gives greater weight and credibility to the witnesses against Gardner, who it thus appears is the sole principal by direct participation in the crime of falsification herein prosecuted.
No circumstances of mitigation or aggravation were’ present in the commission of the crime and consequently the proper penalty should be imposed in its medium grade.
With respect to the points made in the brief for the defense, it is sufficient to show that Jameson and Kilp testified under oath at the trial as witnesses and not as accomplices in the crime, and that the conviction of the defendant rests not only on their testimony but also on other evidence for the prosecution and upon evidence in the record considered as a whole.
For these reasons we are of the opinion that the judgment of the trial court should be reversed and Alonso P. Gardner should be condemned to the penalty of seventeen years four months and one day of cadena temporal, with the accessories of the civil interdiction of the defendant during the period of the penalty, that of absolute perpetual disqualification and subjection to the vigilance of the authorities during his lifetime, to the payment of 25 Mexican pesos to the Chinaman Ah Fun, and to the payment of the costs.
Judgment will be entered accordingly, and the case will be remanded to the court below with a certified copy of this decision for execution. So ordered.
Arellano, C. J., Willard, and Mapa, JJ., concur.