G.R. No. 1574. April 13, 1904

February 16, 1903, one of the deputy prosecuting attorneys of the
city of Manila filed an information in the Court of First Instance
charging Espiridion Yandon, Tan Chan Chang, Choa Chi Co, Chong Quah Co,
Lim Tan Co, Uy Bunta, Ny Chin, Lucia Alcantara, Placida Flores, Juana
Villara, and Patricia Yandan with the crime of vagrancy, in that on or
about the 16th of February, 1903, the said accused lived in and about a
house of ill fame, at No. 94 Calle Hang-Hang, Binondo, Manila,
Philippine Islands, the said defendants being depraved and dissolute
persons, and the women, Alcantara, Villara, Flores, and Yandan being
common prostitutes; this against the statute in the case made and
provided.

The accused pleaded not guilty. Upon the evidence introduced at the
trial the court below on February 20, 1903, condemned Lucia Alcantara
to one year’s imprisonment at hard labor in Bilibid Prison; Espiridion
Yandon to ten months’ imprisonment; the Chinamen, Tan Chan Chang, Choa
Chi Co, Chong Quah Co, Lim Tan Co, Uy Bunta, Ny Chin, and the women,
Patricia Yandan and Placida Flores, to six months’ imprisonment, and
Juana Villara to one month’s imprisonment in the same prison. These
accused commenced to work out the penalty on the date of the judgment,
February 20, 1903. The Chinaman Choa Chi Co appealed, but the judgment
of the Court of First Instance became final as to the other accused,
with whom, consequently, this decision does not deal.

Carl B. Hard and George W. Marshall, detectives, testified that the
house, No. 94 Calle Ilang-Ilang, Binondo, was a house of prostitution,
and that the women who lived there were all prostitutes; that the house
was operated by Lucia Alcantara and a tall Chinaman called Ny Chin, who
was arrested in the house together with the other accused; that the
first time the witness Hard went to the house to make an investigation
he caught the girl Juana Villara and at her own request sent her by
train to the town of Malabon, but that upon returning to the house upon
another occasion, between 9 and 10 o’clock at night, he found the same
girl there again, and that she told him, with tears, that she had been
compelled to return to it; that the witness made an examination of the
house, and found a number of women there in conversation with some
Chinese, and in a number of the rooms found men and women together;
that Lucia Alcantara was one of the most widely known of the
prostitutes, she having formerly been engaged in the same occupation in
Calamba; the witness further stated that this woman was the one who
instructed the girls engaged in these practices; that the men arrested
at the house were lewd and dissolute fellows, who were always in
Company with prostitutes. The witness Marshall testified that he had
known the four women and some of the Chinese arrested for some fifteen
days; that the women were prostitutes and that the men were of lewd and
dissolute habits; that on one of the occasions upon which he had
visited the house in question he had found some women in bed with
Chinamen; that the Chinaman, Ny Chin, told him that he had a license,
and was engaged in business; that Patricia Yandan told the witness that
she had been taken to that house by her brother, Espiridion Yandan.

Capt. Ward P. Shattuck, of the Metropolitan police, also testified
that the house, 94 Calle Ilang-Ilang, had been regarded with suspicion
from the beginning, and that some weeks afterwards he was informed by
his men that it was a house of prostitution; that a woman, whose name
he did not remember, accompanied by a Chinaman, presented a petition
for a license to establish a second-class bar therein ; that the
license was not granted because of information received showing that
the house had a bad reputation and was the rendezvous of prostitutes.

According to Act No. 519, every lewd and dissolute person who lives
in and about houses of ill fame, and every common prostitute, is a
vagrant, and upon conviction may be punished by a fine not exceeding $100, or by imprisonment not exceeding one year and one day, or both, in
the discretion of the court.

As to the appellant, Choa Chi Co, there is no evidence other than
that he was arrested, together with the other defendants, at the house,
No. 94 Calle Ilang-Ilang, known to be a house of ill fame.

There is no evidence whatever to show that the said Choa Chi Co
frequented that house or lived in it, or that he was a person of lewd
and dissolute habits, without known trade or occupation. On the
contrary, the evidence shows that appellant lived at No. 239 Calle
Rosario; that he was a clerk in the store established in the house, and
that he happened to be found in the house of ill fame on Calle
Ilang-Ilang because he had gone there to look for a fellow lodger whom
he did not find there. Consequently, there
being no evidence of his guilt, he must be acquitted.

For the reason stated, it is our opinion that the judgment of the
court below must be reversed with respect to the appellant, Choa Chi
Co, and that he be acquitted with one-tenth of the costs of both
instances de oficio. The
case will be remanded to the trial court with a certified copy of this
decision, and of the judgment to be entered in accordance therewith,
for execution thereof. So ordered.

Arellano, C.J., Cooper, Mapa, and McDonough, JJ., concur.

Johnson, J., did not sit in this case.