Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. L-6343 March 11, 1911
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
MANUEL RODRIGUEZ, ET AL., defendants-appellants.
W.L. Wright for appellants.
Acting Attorney-General Harvey, for appellee.
MORELAND, J.:
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of the Moro Province, Hon. Herbert D. Gale presiding, convicting the accused of the crime defined and punished in section 1 of Act No. 619, and sentencing each one of them to ten years in prison and a fine of P20,000 to subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay one fourteenth part of the costs.
It appears from the proofs adduced by the Government that on Sunday, the 6th of June, 1909, at about 10:30 o'clock at night, twenty-three of the soldiers composing the Second Company of Constabulary stationed at Davao mutinied. During the progress of the mutiny they shot Lieut. Antonio de Goicuria, one of the officers of said company, wounding him in the left leg. Having thrown off all control, they started to flee from the locality. For this purpose they divided themselves into two groups, one passing along Calle San Pedro and the other along Calle Magallanes in said village. The group which passed along Calle San Pedro encountered Lieutenant De Balaine of the Constabulary and the governor of the district, Mr. Walker, at whom they fired several shots. The soldiers thus mutinying, among whom were the fourteen appellants in this case, were under the leadership of Serg. Manuel Rodriguez, one of the appellants, and one Serg. Felix Academia. Having passed through the city in this manner, the two groups united at the Davao ford and, crossing the river, marched to the mountains of Lipadas, where they remained until the 8th day of said month of June, on which date returned and attacked the village of Davao.
That the appellants in this case mutinied against their superior officers in the manner described is unquestioned. Those of the accused who testified in their own behalf admitted the fact. So clear is the case that a detailed discussion of the facts would be idle.
No general defense was presented by the appellants. Two or three, among them Manuel Rodriguez, asserted that they were forced to join the mutineers by Sergeant Academia, who seized them and under threat to kill them compelled them to go with him. There is substantially nothing in the evidence which justifies such defense. Every act of those who set up such defense is distinctly in contradiction to the allegations. That the appellants each and every one were guilty of mutiny, voluntarily and willfully, is so clear from the record as to make it entirely useless to detail the proofs. The defendants generally, while not offering a defense, present as an excuse for the mutiny the abuse to which they had been severally subjected at the hands of their superior officers, including Lieutenant De Goicuria, whom they assaulted and shot during the mutiny. That they were treated harshly and were abused to some extent is unquestioned. Under all of the facts of the case, however, we are of the opinion that such treatment ought not to weigh in favor of the appellants. They had within their power a method by which such abuses could be corrected and this is the course that they should have followed. Their conduct during the mutiny, and the acts of spoliation and murder committed subsequent thereto, leave no room for leniency.
For the reasons, the judgment appealed from is affirmed, with the costs against the appellants.
Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Carson, and Trent, JJ., concur.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
