G.R. No. 1989. January 23, 1905

The defendant in this case was charged with the crime of sedition
and was tried in the Court of First Instance of the Province of Nueva
Ecija. After hearing the testimony in the case and the arguments of the
counsel for the State and the defendant, the court found that the
evidence was not sufficient to support the charge of sedition, but did
find that the evidence was sufficient to find the defendant guilty of a
violation of section 1 of Act No. 619, and sentenced him to five years de presidio and to pay the costs.

The evidence shows that the defendant, in the month of February,
1903, was a Constabulary soldier, and was stationed in the pueblo of
San Jose, in said province; that the Constabulary were attacked by the
band of Felipe Salvador, called “Santa Iglesia,” composed of about one
hundred armed persons; that at the time of the attack the defendant was
acting as corporal of the guard; that the band was armed with firearms,
bolos, and clubs; that the object of the said band was to capture the
arms of the Constabulary; that when the said band retired from the
attack the said defendant retired with them; that he was the only
member of the Constabulary who was captured or went away with said
band; that later the accused was captured in company with said band of
Felipe Salvador. The defendant offered no defense whatever.

The evidence adduced in this case clearly fails to show that the
defendant was guilty of the crime of sedition, as defined in section 5
of Act No. 292 of the Commission, and the question is whether or not a
Court of First Instance, where a person is charged with the crime of
sedition, can find the defendant guilty of the crime defined in Act No.
619, an act entitled “An act to promote good order and discipline in
the Philippines Constabulary.”

Section 1 of Act No. 619 provides:

“Any member of the Constabulary who begins, excites,
causes, or joins in any opposition or resistance to, or defiance of,
any superior authority in the Constabulary with intent to usurp,
subvert, or override the same, or who, being present, does not use his
utmost endeavor to suppress all such opposition, resistance, or
defiance, or who, having knowledge of any such opposition, resistance,
or defiance being intended, does not, without delay, give information
thereof to such superior authority, shall be fined not exceeding ten
thousand dollars or imprisoned not exceeding ten years, or both.”

Act No. 619 is an act to promote good order and discipline in the
Philippines Constabulary. Section 1 of said act punishes the members of
the Constabulary who in any way manifest or excite or join in any
opposition or resistance or defiance of “any superior authority in the
Constabulary” with intent to usurp, subvert, or override such
authority; or who, being present, does not use his utmost endeavor to
suppress such opposition or resistance or who does not give information
to such “superior authority.”

Act No. 292 of the Civil Commission, creating the punishment for the
crime of sedition, was enacted for the purpose of punishing resistance
to the lawful authority and laws of the Government.

Act No. 619 is purely disciplinary in its operation, enacted for the
purpose of preserving the loyalty and obedience of the members of the
Constabulary to the “superior authority in the Constabulary.” The
offense created by Act No. 619 is not a cognate offense to the crime of
sedition. When a person is charged in a complaint with a crime under
the provisions of General Orders, No. 58, and the evidence does not
show that he is guilty of the crime charged, but does show that he is
guilty of some crime or other lesser offense, the court may sentence
him for the other lesser offense, provided the lesser offense is a
cognate offense and is included in the complaint with the court.

An offense against the “superior authority in the Constabulary” is
not a cognate offense to an offense against the sovereignty or laws of
the State and the court could not under a complaint for sedition,
defined in section 5 of Act No. 292, find the defendant guilty of the
crime defined in section 1 of Act No. 619. Therefore the sentence in
this case is reversed and the provincial fiscal is hereby ordered to
present a complaint against the defendant for a violation of the
provisions of Act No. 619 of the Philippine Commission within ten days
after this cause is received by the clerk of the Court of First
Instance of said province. The clerk of the Court of First Instance of
the Province of Nueva Ecija is hereby directed, upon receipt of this
decision, to give the fiscal of said province immediate notice of the
foregoing decision. So ordered.

Arellano, C. J., Torres, Mapa, and Carson, JJ., concur.