G.R. No. 1468 - People vs Gardner

On January 20, 1903, the prosecuting attorney of Manila filed an information in the Court of First Instance charging defendants with the crime of falsifying notes or documents equivalent to current money payable to bearer.
The information alleged that on or about January 16, 1903, defendants—including Alonso P. Gardner—altered two genuine United States silver certificates of the value of $1 each by pasting pieces bearing the numeral “10” and obliterating parts of the original inscription so that they appeared to be worth $10 each.
Initially, the charges involved Gardner, Jameson, and Kilp; however, before trial, defendants Jameson and Kilp were discharged pursuant to section 34 of General Orders, No. 58, leaving Gardner as the sole accused at trial.

During the afternoon of January 16, 1903, in the “Soldiers’ Institute” in Santa Cruz, Manila:

Gardner instructed his companion, Jameson, to purchase a bottle of mucilage and a blue pencil from a bookstore near the post-office by giving him half a dollar.
Jameson later identified one of the blue pencils exhibited at the trial.

Jameson’s testimony, corroborated by A. Presby—owner of the Manila Stationery Company—involved the purchase and identification of the mucilage and blue pencil.
Later in the afternoon, around 6 to 7 o’clock, Gardner and Jameson visited the Malate barracks:

At the barracks, they encountered a soldier and conversed before leaving the premises.
Outside a tailor shop, Gardner handed Jameson a bill for exchange, promising him half its value in silver.
Upon noticing the bill’s defect, Gardner acknowledged that it was intentionally “made with mucilage” and instructed Jameson to get it changed.

Jameson cashed the bill, received 25 pesos, and later returned to meet Gardner at the Soldiers’ Institute.
Jameson described the bill exchanged, detailed the alteration on the bill on record (number 54226499), and identified additional Confederate bills in Gardner’s possession.
Additional witnesses (such as the Chinaman Ah Fun, detective George W. Marshall, policeman Jerome Patterson, keeper Maria Sanchez, and witness William F. Kilp) provided testimony regarding:

The identification and nature of the forged bills.
The circumstances of attempted passage of the altered bills in various locales (e.g., Chinese houses, a tailor shop, and a house of prostitution in Sampaloc).

The evidence showed that two genuine $1 United States silver certificates were altered:

One certificate was successfully cashed, thereby fraudulently obtaining silver in exchange for a certificate originally worth $1.
The second certificate’s forgery was detected before it could be cashed.

Article 289 of the Penal Code was cited as the basis for punishing the falsification of instruments payable to bearer, classes of documents meant to substitute official currency.
The case emphasized that while silver certificates function as documents of credit (intended to substitute for coined money), they do not contain intrinsic value as commodity money.

Alonso P. Gardner pleaded not guilty and testified regarding events in the Soldiers’ Institute and other locations:

Gardner recounted interactions with Jameson and Kilp concerning the handling of bills, details of casual exchanges of money, and other incidental events on January 16 and 17, 1903.
He denied direct involvement in the actual alterations of the certificates.

Gardner’s testimony was supported by the claim that he had no interest in the provenance of the bills, although the evidence demonstrated:

His direct purchasing of items (mucilage and pencil) specifically used in the alteration process.
His attempt to direct or influence witness testimony in his favor while in custody.

Whether the alterations made by Gardner—pasting the numeral “10” over the original “1” and obliterating details—constituted the crime of falsification of documents payable to bearer as defined in Article 289 of the Penal Code.
Whether the offense in question should be treated as counterfeiting money (under Chapter II, including Article 282) rather than falsification of documents (Chapter III).

Whether United States silver certificates, though functioning as legal-tender instruments, should be considered “bank notes or other instruments payable to bearer” as contemplated by Article 289.
The legal debate on the intrinsic versus representative value of paper money versus coined money.

Whether the testimonies of witnesses such as Jameson, Kilp, and others provided conclusive evidence to establish Gardner’s direct participation in the alteration and circulation of the forged certificates.
Whether Gardner’s own testimony and explanations weakened or mitigated the evidence against him.

Whether the proper penalty should be that prescribed by Article 289 (with penalties ranging from cadena temporal to cadena perpetua) based on the severity and manner of the forgery.
The contrasting views in dissenting opinions regarding whether a lesser penalty (as would be appropriate for counterfeiting money under Article 282 or for estafa) should be imposed.