Garchitorena - v. - Crescini20210424-12-1kx78l5

EN BANC
[G.R. No. 14514. December 18, 1918.]
ANDRES GARCHITORENA, petitioner-appellant , vs. MANUEL

CRESCINI and ENGRACIO IMPERIAL, respondents-appellee.
Kincaid & Perkirns and Manly, Goddard & Lockwood for appellant
Crescini.
Sulpicio V. Cea for appellant Imperial.
Lawrence & Ross for appellee.
SYLLABUS
1. ELECTIONS; WHEN THE ENTIRE ELECTION SHOULD BE NULLIFIED. —

Courts, of course, should be slow in nullifying and setting aside the election
in particular municipalities or precincts. They should not nullify the vote until
it is shown that the irregularities and frauds are so numerous as to show an
unmistakable intention or design to defraud, and which do, in fact, defeat
the true expression of the opinion and wishes of the voters of said
municipality or precinct. The evidence in the present case shows an
unmistakable intention and design on the part, not only of the election
inspectors, but many of the voters, to defeat, by the methods adopted, the
true expression of opinion, through the ballot, of the people of said
municipality. When the election has been conducted so irregularly and
fraudulently that the true result cannot be ascertained, the whole return
must be rejected. The rule is so well established that authorities need no
longer be cited in its support that whenever the irregularities and frauds are
sufficient to defeat the will of the people of the particular municipality or
precinct, the entire vote should be rejected and those who are guilty of such
frauds and irregularities should be punished to the very limit of the law.
DECISION
JOHNSON, J : p
This is an appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of the

Province of Ambos Camarines in an election contest. It appears from the
record that on the 6th day of June, 1916, an election was held in said
province for governor, and other provincial and municipal officers. At said
election, Andres Garchitorena, Manuel Crescini, Engracio Imperial, and
Francisco Botor were candidates for the office of governor. The election was
closed. The returns were made by the inspectors of the various
municipalities to the provincial board of inspectors which, after an
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
examination of said returns, reached the conclusion that Andres
Garchitorena had received 2,468 votes; that Manuel Crescini had received
3,198 votes; that Engracio Imperial had received 1,954 votes and Francisco
Botor had received 692 votes. Upon that result the provincial board of
inspectors decided that Manuel Crescini had received a plurality of all votes
cast, made a proclamation declaring that he had been elected Governor, and
issued to him a certificate to that effect.
Immediately upon notice of said proclamation, Andres Garchitorena
presented a protest against said election, alleging that many frauds and
irregularities had been committed in various municipalities of said province,
and that he had, in fact, received a majority of all legal votes cast. To said
protest answer was duly made, issue was joined, and a trial was had, after
which the Honorable Maximino Mina, judge, in a very carefully prepared
opinion, declared that Andres Garchitorena had, in fact, received a majority
of the legal votes cast, and ordered the provincial board of inspectors to
correct its report theretofore made, accordingly. Later, for certain reasons, a
new trial was ordered (37 Phil. Rep., 675), 1 which was had before the
Honorable Isidro Paredes, judge, who, after considering all the proof adduced
during the trial of the cause, reached exactly the conclusion which Judge
Maximino Mina had theretofore reached, and issued the same order to the
provincial board of inspectors, requiring them to correct their report or
canvass in accordance with said decision. From that decision, Manuel
Crescini and Engracio Imperial appealed to this Court, briefs were presented,
and the cause was finally submitted for decision on the 16th day of
December, 1918.
The following table discloses the votes of the various municipalities to
which the protest related, as declared by the provincial board of inspectors,
as well as the result found by both Judges Mina and Paredes:
Election protest — Ambos Camarines.
———————————————————————————————————————
Municipalities Prov. B. Mina Paredes Gar. Cre.
of Insp.
———————————————————————————————————————
Gar. Cre. P Gar. Cre. P Gar. Cre. G. L. G. L.
———————————————————————————————————————
Capalonga 1 6 65 11 6 2 11 6 10 00 00 000
Minabalac 10 00 108 Ann. 2 Ann. 00 10 00 00
Mambulao 73 00 109 82 2 3 82 2 9 00 2 00
Nabua 164 110 110 164 110 4 164 110 00 00 00 00
Sagnay 11 173 110 Ann. 10 Ann. 00 11 00 173
Baao 6 133 2 5 126 14 5 126 00 1 00 7
Bato 32 292 13 Ann. 22 Ann. 00 32 00 292
Buhi 39 280 32 52 186 26 50 149 13 00 00 94
Calabanga 81 134 46 62 45 31 62 45 00 19 00 89
Iriga 8 926 66 Ann. 35 Ann. 00 8 00 296
Lagonoy 30 91 99 Ann. 5 Ann. 00 30 00 91
— — — —
Total gain and losses 32 111 21,672
— — — —
Net losses (total gain subtracted from total 79 1,670
losses)
Total vote as result of this

decision:
(a) Garchitorena 2389 (3287)
(b) Crescini 1428 (1441)
———————————————————————————————————————
NOTE.— Abbreviations used.
Prov. B. Insp.= Provincial board of Inspector.

Gar.= Garchitorena.
Cre.= Cresini.
P.= page.
G.= gains.
L.= losses.
Ann.= Annulled.
The carefully prepared opinions of Judges Mina and Paredes present

such a complete analysis of the proof that we deem them of sufficient value
and importance, in relation with the questions presented by the appellants,
to attach to and make them a part of this decision as ExhibitsA and B,
respectively. 2
An examination of the table above inserted shows that because of the
frauds mentioned in the decision of Judges Mina and Paredes, the entire vote
in the municipalities of Minalabac, Sagnay, Bato, Iriga, and Lagonoy, were
annulled. Judges Mina and Paredes, after discussion of the various frauds
committed in said municipalities arrived at the same conclusion, to wit: that
said frauds and irregularities were such as to absolutely defeat the honest
expression of the desires of the voters of said municipalities. Courts, of
course, should be slow in nullifying and setting aside the election in
particular municipalities or precincts, and they should not nullify the vote
until it is shown that the irregularities and frauds are so numerous as to
show an unmistakable intention or design to defraud, and which does
actually and in fact defeat the true expression of the opinion of the voters of
said precinct or municipality. A reading of the evidence adduced during the
trial of the cause, in relation with the facts stated in connection there-with, in
said municipalities, shows an unmistakable intention and design on the part
not only of the election inspectors but of many of the voters, to defeat, by
the methods adopted, the true expression of opinion, through the ballot, of
the people of said municipalities. The presumption is that an election is
honestly conducted, and the burden of proof to show it otherwise is on the
party assailing the return. But when the return is clearly shown to be wilfully
and corruptly false, the whole of it becomes worthless as proof. When the
election has been conducted so irregularly and fraudulently that the true
result cannot be ascertained, the whole return must be rejected. It is
impossible to make a list of all the frauds which will invalidate an election.
Each case must rest upon its own evidence. The rule, however, is so well
established that authorities need no longer be cited in its support, that
whenever the irregularities and frauds are sufficient to defeat the will of the
people of the particular municipality or precinct, the entire vote should be
rejected, and those who are guilty of such frauds and irregularities should be
punished to the very limit of the law. (Patton vs. Watkins, 131 Ala., 387;
Gardiner vs. Romulo, 26 Phil. Rep., 521; The State vs. Sullivan, 44 Kan., 43;
Londoner vs. People, 15 Colo., 557; Washburn vs. Voorhis, 2 Bart., 54;
People vs. Cook, 8 N. Y., 67; The State vs. Malo, 42 Kan., 54, 120, 164.)
The record of the frauds and irregularities committed in the said
municipalities in which Judges Mina and Paredes annulled the entire vote,
not only shows that legal voters were prevented from voting, but in some
instances, legal ballots were tampered with and destroyed after they had
been cast, to such an extent that no confidence can be placed in the return.
The return in no sense discloses the expressed will of the voters. Search has
been made in vain for cases in jurisprudence in which the frauds and
irregularities committed were more glaring and more atrocious, and in which
the real will of the voters were more effectively defeated, than is found in
the records in said municipalities in the present case. The statements of fact
made by Judges Mina and Paredes relating to said frauds and irregularities
are fully sustained by the evidence adduced during the trial of the cause.
When two able, impartial, independent and conscientious judges, such
as Judges Mina and Paredes, each examine in detail the proof adduced in the
trial of the cause and in an extended and carefully prepared opinion, each
reach the same conclusion, there is little left to be added.
After a careful examination of the proof adduced during the trial, we
are fully persuaded that the conclusions reached by the court a quo is fully
supported thereby. While perhaps some errors were committed in rejecting
some of the votes of analfabetos (illiterates persons), the same, even though
they were counted, would not be sufficient to change the general result.
Therefore, and without a further detailed discussion at this time of the
various assignments of error, of the facts, and of the law, the judgment and
order of Judge Isidro Paredes is hereby confirmed, with costs against the
appellant, Manuel Crescini, with the provision that whatever costs Engracio
Imperial had incurred shall be paid by him. And it is hereby further ordered
and decreed that the record be immediately returned to the lower court with
direction that an order be entered immediately in accordance here with. So
ordered.
We are not disposed to close this decision without taking note of the
recommendation with reference to the criminal prosecution of the election
inspectors and other persons of various municipalities, who wilfully and
maliciously participated in the various irregularities and frauds. The record
demonstrates that not only the inspectors in said municipalities, but other
persons, wilfully and maliciously violated the Election Law, and should
therefore be punished criminally under the provisions of Section 29 of Act
No. 1582, as amended by Section 2632 of Act No. 2657 (as amended by
Section 2639 of Act No. 2711). We most earnestly recommended that the
Attorney-General immediately investigate the conduct of the various election
inspectors and other persons, in the municipalities of Bato, Buhi, Calabanga,
Iriga and Sagnay, as well as others, in which frauds were committed, who
were instrumental in defeating the will of the voters in the full and legal
exercise of their elective franchise, and to instigate criminal actions against
all such persons, if the facts are found to be sufficient, to the end that in the
future voters may be permitted to participate in the affairs of their
government, through the ballot, untrammelled and unmolested.
In democracies the people, combined, represent the sovereign power
of the State. Their sovereign authority is exercised through the ballot, of the
qualified voters, in duly appointed elections held from time to time, by
means of which they choose their officials for definite and fixed periods, and
to whom they entrust, for the time being, as their representatives, the
exercise of the powers of government.
It is just such conduct, on the part of those in authority, as is described
in the records in the present case which breeds dissension, disorder, distrust,
and unrest among the people; it creates enmity, animosity and hatred
among otherwise friendly neighbors; it gives birth to a spirit of anarchism
and despair in organized governments; through it socialists are born and
communism runs riot; it engenders distrust and hatred of public officials,
creates a spirit of anihilism and a disregard for individual and property
rights; it is just such conduct, on the part of public officers, upon which
Bolshevists feed, thrive, and survive, and which results in the overthrow of
governments, and the establishment of reigns of terror. The pages of history
are filled with incidents showing the disastrous results to governments
where the officials have their winked at, or actually participated in acts
which result in depriving the people of their right to have a voice in the
affairs of their government, and to express it without let, hindrance, or
molestation. And it is not necessary to search ancient history for examples
of what we have said. A people, no matter how patient and peace-loving, will
not endure the deprivation of their rights and liberties forever.
Arellano, C.J., Torres, Araullo, Malcolm and Avanceña, JJ., concur.
Street, J., reserves his vote.
"EXHIBIT A.
"[United States of America, Philippine Islands. In the Court of First
Instance of Ambos Camarines, Fifteenth Judicial District. Civil Case No.
______ Reelection contest for the office of Governor.] respondent.
"Albert E. Somersille and Julian Ocampo , in behalf of petitioner.
"L. D. Lockwood and Rafael de la Sierra, in behalf of respondent.
"DECISION.
"In this case, Andres Garchitorena, one of the candidates voted
for the office of provincial governor of the province of Ambos
Camarines, P. I., protests against the election of the successful
candidate, Manuel Crescini, and challenges it on the grounds
specifically stated in his motion.
"The motion is accompanied, as an integral part thereof, by a
certified copy of the returns and proclamation by the provincial board,
acting as a board of canvassers, according to which copy the
respondent, Manuel Crescini, obtained 3,198 votes, the petitioner,
Andres Garchitorena 2,468, Engracio B. Imperial 1,954, and Francisco
Botor 692. All these candidates acknowledged service of notice of this
protest within the legal period and raised no objections whatever in the
matter.
"This protest affects eleven municipalities of the province, in
which the total number of votes cast for both of the herein opposing
candidates is 2,620. These municipalities are the following: Baao, Bato,
Buhi, Calabanga, Capalonga, Iriga, Lagonoy, Mambulao, Minalabac,
Nabua, and Sagnay.
"The protestant was represented by attorneys Albert E.
Somersille and Julian Ocampo, and the protestee, by Attorneys L. D.
Lockwood and Rafael de la Sierra.
"After the decision of several incidental issues raised by the
parties, this case was finally heard. The protestant presented
numerous proofs, both oral and documentary, whereby nearly all the
time that the hearing on this protest lasted was taken up, while but
little evidence was introduced by the protestee.
"In order to proceed with clearness and a certain order, the court
will examine the manifold issues raised by the parties, in the light of
the large amount of evidence that has been accumulated, that of one
municipality separately from that of another, and in each instance will
dwell on the facts and the points of law brought into discussion, the
resolution of which be necessary for a proper decision of this litigation.
"Municipality of Baao.
"The following grounds are advanced in the protest with respect
to this municipality:
"'(a) The polling place of this municipality was situated on the
upper floor of the municipal building, and to enter the place stairs had
to be climbed. The booths were formed with screens joined to the walls
of the building, one leaf of each screen serving as a door for the
respective booth, in such manner that the voter inside the latter could
not be seen, inasmuch as this door was not raised fifty centimeters
from the floor, as prescribed by law. In the polling place there was no
guard rail placed at least two meters from the ballot boxes and from
the booths, and no entrance and exit were provided, the one separate
from the other, as required by law.
"'(b) The election inspectors of this precinct, named Andres
Baesa, Ignacio Britanico, and Facundo Badong, all partisans. of the
respondent, observed, during the voting and the canvass of the ballots
on the day of the election, the following conduct notoriously in conflict
with the law and vexatious to the voters: (1) The inspector Facundo
Badong called aloud the voters, one by one, who were waiting at a
distance of thirty meters from the polling place, and not until the
person called had finished voting did he call another; so that the votes
were cast one by one, notwithstanding there were in Baao 419
registered voters, for whom eight booths had been provided; (2) no
voter, besides those called by Facundo Badong, was permitted to enter
the polling place; (3) said inspectors prepared and marked the ballots
of the illiterate voters who solicited their assistance, and did so without
previously consulting them as to whom they intended to vote for; (4)
said inspectors, violating the secrecy of the ballot, entered the booths
in company with voters able to read and write, in order to see what the
latter wrote on their ballots, and forced them to vote for the
respondent; (5) the canvass of the votes cast was not effected within
view of the watchers representing the candidates and (6), on account
of such unworthy and improper conduct on the part of the inspectors,
the petitioner believes, and so alleges, that many of the ballots
counted in the canvass as votes for the respondent are really votes for
the petitioner, or for other candidates for the office of provincial
governor.
"'(c) The respondent, in connivance with the present provincial
governor, Jose Fuentebella, who was the principal supporter of the
former's candidacy, conceived together with Fuentebella, the plan of
removing, on the very day of the election, Paulino Bernas from his
office of election inspector for said precinct of Baao, and for this
purpose availed himself of the services of the municipal president of
the same town, Julian Barrameda, who was another of the respondent's
followers and a principal supporter of his candidacy. So when the said
Bernas went to the polling place on the day referred to, at the hour for
the opening of the polls, he was met by the municipal president Julian
Barrameda who handed him an executive order issued by himself
suspending him from office under the pretext that he, Bernas, was
delinquent in the payment of his land tax. Bernas protested against
this unjust and sudden suspension, but said municipal president, with
the cooperation of the other election inspectors and certain policemen
and members of the Constabulary, expelled Bernas by main force from
the polling place, and immediately thereafter the two remaining
election inspectors appointed the municipal policeman Facundo
Badong to substitute the said Bernas. In view of this unexpected
occurrence and violence, which was a threat to the voters, and in
consideration of the oppressive procedure, contrary to law, adopted by
the inspectors in relation to the casting of votes, as above related,
about two-thirds of the voters registered in this precinct, partisans of
the petitioner in their great majority, found themselves obliged to
refrain from voting. Had they voted, the result of the election in this
precinct would have been different.
"'The names and listed numbers of these electors are those that
appear in the attached Exhibit B, which forms an integral part of his
protest.
"'The very summary suspension of the inspector Bernas is
ascribable as a cause solely to the fact that he was not an adherent of
the respondent and did not agree to the latter's plans to harm the
election by means of fraud. Bernas is a man of unquestionable morality
and honor, and the electorate of Baao reposed and reposes in him their
absolute confidence.'
"The protestee, in his answer, set up a special defense with
respect to this municipality, alleging:
"'1. That it is not true that the respondent has taken part in any
manner, direct or indirect, in the suspension of the election inspector
Paulino Bernas, who is precisely a personal friend and political
adherent of the respondent.
"'2. That the differences and questions had in the municipality of
Baao were due to the excitement caused in the designation of the
incumbent for the office of municipal president, that is, they were
merely a matter of local politics, and that the matter of the election of
a provincial governor in no wise concerned those differences and
questions, for, in said municipality of Baao, nearly all the voters are
partisans of this respondent, and the small remaining minority,
partisans of the candidate Engracio B. Imperial; while the petitioner has
no political influence whatever in his town.
"'3. That, although it is true that in this municipality some
electors did fail to vote, it was due to their own voluntary desistance or
waiver of their right in consequence of the differences or questions of
local politics that arose in connection with the election for the office of
municipal president; that the inspectors called those electors and
invited them to vote, affording them all the necessary opportunities so
to do; and that the respondent himself went to the town of Baao on the
day of the election and begged said electors to vote, as they were
nearly all of them his partisans, but that they refused to do so, owing
to the aforementioned political questions of a local character.
"'4. That, by the failure of said electors to vote, no detriment was
caused the petitioner, while the respondent did suffer greatly thereby,
because, as aforesaid, nearly all of the said electors were partisans of
the respondent.'
"From the documentary and oral evidence taken at the trial it
appears that the general elections held in the municipality of Baao,
Ambos Camarines, on June 6, 1916, took place under the following
circumstances: "On March 7, 1916, the municipal council of Baao,
presided over by the municipal president Julian Barrameda, adopted its
resolution No. 21 (Exhibit D, Baao), which is as follows:
"'Councilor Bernardino Arroyo presented the following motion:
"For the purpose of exactly complying with the law, and it being well
known that in this municipality there are two opposing political parties
headed, one of them by J. H. Barrameda, and the other by Tomas
Guevara, it is desirable that for the party led by the first name, which
obtained a majority of votes in the last election, there should be
appointed two inspectors and that for the other party one inspector
should be given, in order that the two candidates in the approaching
elections, Eleuterio Arroyo, belonging to the majority party, and Felix
Imperial, belonging to the minority party, be duly represented by their
respective inspectors. It is therefore recommended that the council
take the action proposed in this motion."
"'On motion by the chairman:"
"'Be it resolved: To appoint, as there are hereby appointed at the
discretion of this council, Andres Baesa, Paulino Bernas, and Ignacio
Britanico, as election inspectors, and Crispulo Badilla, as poll clerk."
The first two obtained seven votes, and the last two, six votes."
"'Be it further resolved: To spread on the record that the
preceding appointments, made at the council's own discretion, as
aforestated, were prompted by the fact that neither of the opposing
political parties of this town presented any proposal in this matter; and
to direct the municipal president to issue to said appointees their
proper appointments within the period specified by law."
"'It was so resolved by a majority vote, with respect to the
appointments, and unanimously with respect to the other matters
considered.'
"The document above transcribed, taken in connection with
some of the oral evidence adduced, shows: That there were, as there
are, in the municipality of Baao two opposing political parties, whose
respective leaders are Barrameda and Guevara; that at the time of the
adoption of resolution No. 21, that is, when the appointments were
made of those who were to be election inspectors, Eleuterio Arroyo and
Felix Imperial were the recognized candidates for the office of
municipal president, the former belonged to the majority party and the
latter to the minority and that, notwithstanding that said political
parties took no part in the appointment or designation of the persons
who were to be inspectors, the council did, nevertheless, take into
account the existence of these parties by appointing Andres Baesa and
Ignacio Britanico, belonging to Barrameda's party, and Paulino Bernas,
belonging to Guevara's party.
"There is evidence, and the court so finds, that this voluntary
recognition on the part of the municipal president Barrameda of the
rights of the minority, by the appointment of Paulino Bernas as
inspector, was not due so much to his desire to respect and protect
said minority, as principally to the fact that Paulino Bernas,
notwithstanding that he belonged to the same party as did the
minority party's candidate, Felix Imperial, was a personal enemy of the
latter, there being on this account good reasons to believe that he
would not support him to any great extent, but on the contrary might
work against his candidacy.
"In view thereof, and as Felix Imperial knew his true situation
with respect to his candidacy, he withdrew seeing that, as the day for
the elections approached, there came forward out of his political party
another candidate with greater probabilities of success, namely,
Domingo Fajardo, one of whose good qualifications, as regards the
election strife, was that of his not being a personal enemy of the sole
inspector belonging to his, Fajardo's party, namely, Paulino Bernas.
"These facts having come to the knowledge of the members of
the opposite party, their leader Barrameda tried not only to remove
Paulino Bernas from the board of election inspectors but also to do so
on the very day of the elections, in order thus to control the situation
and to render absolutely futile all attempts of the opposite party
opportunely to obtain any legal redress.
"The plans made with these ends in view were in fact carried into
execution: the inspector Paulino Bernas was expelled from the polling
place, on the very morning of June 6, 1916, and Facundo Badong, a
municipal policeman whose resignation as such was pending
acceptance or disapproval by the municipal council, was appointed in
his stead. If this policeman was not a partisan of Barrameda's, neither
was he a member of the party to which the expelled inspector
belonged.
"This incident, which took place in the presence of nearly all or a
majority of the electors of Baao gathered near or around the polling
place to await the opening of the polls, caused such an impression on
all the voters belonging to the same party as the expelled inspector,
and perhaps also on others not of that party, that they chose to abstain
totally from taking part in the elections, for they saw that they had not
or could not opportunely obtain any legal remedy for the prevalence of
what they believed to be their right.
"The number of the voters who withdrew on this account was
254, and of the 419 voters entered on the election register only 165
voted.
"While the court deems the facts above related to have been
fully proven, not only by a preponderance of the evidence adduced by
the protestant, but also by the admissions of the protestee, yet he is
not of the same opinion as regards the influence which these
underhand tricks of a local character may have had in respect to the
contests for the elections of provincial officers, nor does he believe
there was any such positive proof as regards the direct or indirect
participation which the governor, Fuentebella, may have had therein,
and the pretended community or unity of election interests on the part
of said Governor Fuentebella, the protestee Manuel Crescini, and Julian
Barrameda.
"The court considers very abrupt the conclusion which the
protestant draws from the fact that the said Fuentebella, Crescini, and
Barrameda belong to the same political party, with the additional
circumstance that the first named was governor of the province, and
the second a member of the provincial board; and likewise his
conclusion from the fact that provincial tickets or ballots were found on
which appeared the name of the candidate Crescini together with that
of the candidate Barrameda. (See Exhibit B.)
"In reality, as disclosed by the evidence, there was no struggle of
parties in the matter of the provincial offices, and two of the candidates
for governor (Manuel Crescini and Engracio Imperial) both belonged to
the same party as did Governor Fuentebella, and both were also
members of the provincial board; and as to the provincial tickets or
ballots, there was a variety of them and among these there were free
combinations of names and offices. It appears that, as a rule, the
candidate upon obtaining such tickets would write on some of them
besides his own name another or other names of such candidate or
candidates as he believed to be the most popular, so as to draw
attention and interest, or the candidate would have several tickets with
names and offices differently combined, and to some voters would give
those containing the name, united with others, of the candidate whom
he knew they favored, and would distribute other such combination
tickets to the voters whose preferences were known to incline to some
other different candidate.
"It is not denied, nor can it be denied, that there exists some
relation, mayhap an intimate one, between the different offices to be
voted for in the general elections, but it would be too abrupt a
supposition to infer that there was a relation of coincidence between
the underhand tricks above mentioned and the votes obtained by the
protestee or the votes which the protestant was unable to obtain, as
likewise it would be too venturesome to affirm or contend that the
legality of the election in Baao hinged on the person of the inspector
Bernas and on the concurrence of each one and all of the registered
electors.
"Without discussing here — because the court deems it
unnecessary to do so and this is not the proper place for it — whether
or not the municipal president Barrameda or the other election
inspectors proceeded legally in eliminating Paulino Bernas from the
board of inspectors or in expelling him from the polling place; whether
or not there was good and sufficient ground for said officials to have
proceeded as they did; whether or not the policeman Facundo Badong,
who resigned as such, was qualified to be appointed inspector instead
of Bernas; and whether or not the 254 voters of Baao, of the political
party contrary to that to which Barrameda belonged, did right or wrong
in abstaining from casting their votes for the reasons stated in the
petition subscribed by them, Exhibit E, it is obvious that, with the
exception of this incident that happened on the morning of the
elections, the latter followed their course in relatively good order in the
polling place and booths, which no doubt, owing to their imperfection
and deficient condition, could not serve as models, but which were
provided with the necessary safeguards for the free and secret
expression of the will of the voters.
"From the protestant's own evidence it is disclosed that the
partisans of the candidate for municipal president Domingo Fajardo
had not, properly speaking, centered upon any candidate for governor
such as might be said to the choice of the group; some of them were
known to favor the candidacy of Imperial, others seemed to be inclined
in favor of that of Garchitorena, still others would have liked to see
Botor triumph, and the rest desired the election of Crescini.
"The allegations that 'the inspectors prepared and marked the
ballots of the illiterate voters who solicited their assistance, without
previously consulting the latter as to whom they intended to vote for,
and that said inspectors, violating the secrecy of the ballot, entered the
booths in company with voters who could read and write, to see what
they wrote on their ballots, and forced them to vote for the respondent'
are not sustained by the evidence, and the protestant's suspicion, that
in the canvass, said inspectors counted as votes for the protestee
some which really had been cast for the protestant or for other
candidates for the office of governor, rests on no serious and
reasonable ground.
"And protestant's counsel do not insists nor maintain in their
brief that they proved those averments of their motion, and merely
touch lightly upon those relative to certain supposed irregularities in
the manner of conducting the elections and to the construction or
arrangement of the polling place and the booths. It is easy to
comprehend that though it were proven that such irregularities, or,
more properly speaking, imperfections of the polling place and booths
used, did exist, they cannot, in the absence of fraud, vitiate nor much
less invalidate the elections held in the single precinct of Baao.
"In view of the foregoing facts deemed to have been proven and
of the considerations set forth in relation thereto, the court is of the
opinion that for such reasons no change whatever should be made in
the returns of the general elections held in Baao on June 6, 1916. The
persons responsible for the abnormal state or condition of affairs that
prevailed in said municipality on that 6th day of June may be deserving
of censure, perhaps penal or administrative, but that would not warrant
the declaration that the votes of those electors which were cast in an
orderly and honorable manner on the very day and in the manner
prescribed by law are null and void and of no value.
"Now, coming to the matter of the examination and recount of
the votes cast in the single precinct of Baao for provincial governor,
and duly considering the accusations made by the parties, the court
finds that, taking into account that several illiterate electors voted in
said precinct — fact not discussed by the parties — and also taking into
account that the inspectors were not expected to choose the ballots
they prepared for these illiterate voters, it is to be supposed that the
groups of 63, 15, and 8 ballots found to have been written by the same
hand (each group) are those which said inspectors filled out or marked
for the voters incapacitated to do so themselves and who requested
their assistance in conformity with the law.
"In fact, the document Exhibit X, Baao, which is the record of the
proceedings of the board in the matter of assistance to illiterate voters,
shows that 83 electors were assisted by the inspectors Andres Baesa,
Ignacio Britanico, and Facundo Badong, in the proportion, respectively,
of 61, 16, and 6, which numbers differ very little from those above
mentioned of 63, 15, and 8.
"The list shows 61 ballots filled in by Andres Baesa, and the
handwriting expert identified 67 ballots as written by the same hand;
but this court, after a careful examination of these ballots, is of the
opinion that those numbered 36, 45, 46, and 47 are not identical with
nor similar to the other ballots of the same group.
"In the challenge of the ballots, protestant's counsel speaks of a
group of 16 ballots written by the same hand, and, according to the
list, Ignacio Britanico assisted 16 illiterate voters.
"Facundo Badong prepared 6 ballots for illiterate voters, as
against 8 ballots found by the court to be written in the same hand;
for, although the handwriting expert separated 9 ballots to form one
group, it can be seen that the ballot bearing No. 33 was erroneously
included.
"According to the foregoing statements the list should show 63
(64 less 1) electors assisted by Baesa, 14 (15 less 1) by Britanico, and
7 (8 less 1) by Badong, that is to say, one ballot should be deducted
from each group as being cast by the inspector himself and which for
this reason should not of course appear on the list. Now then, adding
together these numbers 63, 14 and 7, we have the sum of 84, and
comparing it with the number of electors given on the list, 83, it is seen
that there is only a difference of one, an error that is easily explained,
if but due account be taken of this kind of work and of all the
circumstances of the case.
"Neither is it difficult to believe that the discrepancy between the
proportions for each inspector (63, 14, and 7 in the ballots, and 61, 16,
and 6 on the list), may be due to involuntary transpositions or mistakes
by recording that Britanico assisted two more electors, when in fact
they must have been assisted by Baesa, or one of them by Baesa and
the other by Badong.
"The court believes that the list of illiterate voters, not
withstanding the slight errors mentioned, is correct within the purview
of the law, was made up honestly by the inspectors and the poll clerk,
and is a faithful record of the proceedings of the board in the matters
of the assistance given to incapacitated electors.
"The other ballots challenged are Nos. 2, 3, 48, 115, and 119, all
for Manuel Crescini and written in the same hand. They are admitted
because in the opinion of the court they were not written by the same
hand.
"Nos. 121 and 138, the first for Manuel Crescini and the second
for Engracio Imperial, are challenged on the same ground. They are
admitted. They are not identical nor similar.
"Nos. 11 and 20, both for Crescini. The same challenge. The
same ruling.
"No. 118, for Crescini, and No. 148, for Francisco Botor. It is
alleged that they are in the same handwriting. They are not, and are
admitted.
"Nos. 9 and 10, for Manuel Crescini. Both are rejected as having
been written by the same hand, and not by any of the inspectors of
election.
"No. 1, written with a drawing pencil, is admitted there being no
proof of fraud.
"According to the election returns Manuel Crescini obtained 133
votes and Andres Garchitorena 6; but the commissioners who were
appointed awarded only 128 to the first and 5 to the second, and did
not award to anybody the ballots found with space for the office of
governor left blank, nor were these ballots claimed.
"The ballots rejected by the inspectors during the canvass and
claimed by the interested parties before the commission are again
rejected.
"Therefore, the following votes, cast in the single election
precinct of Baao, are finally awarded to each of the litigants in this
contest, to wit, to the candidate Manuel Crescini 128 votes, less two
rejected (ballots Nos. 9 and 10), that is, 126 votes, and to the
candidate Andres Garchitorena 5 votes.
"Municipality of Bato.
"The elections in the municipality of Bato are challenged by the
protestant who sets forth in his motion the following grounds:
upper floor of the school building and to gain entrance thereto it was
necessary to climb the stairs. The booths were so small that they each
comprised a space of less than one meter square. One of the sides of
each booth was open, serving as an entrance, and, besides, the desks
placed one in each booth were so arranged that the voter sat facing
the side of the booth, and any one passing along the line of booths
could see what the elector was writing. In this polling place no guard
rail was constructed, situated at least two meters from he ballot boxes
and from the booths. as the law requires.
"'(b) The inspectors of election of said precinct, named Eligio
Calleja, Potenciano Orasa, and Francisco Relos, staunch partisans of
the respondent, deceived and defrauded on a large scale the illiterate
electors of said precinct who solicited their assistance and in such
manner that said inspectors did not inquire of nor consult said illiterate
voters in regard to the person for whom they intended or wished to
vote, but marked the ballots to their, the inspectors' liking, writing in
the space allotted for the candidate for the office of provincial governor
the respondent's name, though such illiterate voters expressed their
desire to vote for the petitioner or for some other candidates for said
office.
"'(c) During the elections said inspectors carried on propaganda
work and did electioneering to induce the electors coming to the
polling place to vote for the respondent, their zeal and interest in this
electioneering reaching such a pitch that they even accompanied
within the booths electors who could read and write, in order to see
what the latter wrote on their respective ballots, and threatened them
with future vengeance if they showed unwillingness to write out or cast
their votes in favor of the respondent, and, not content with this, said
inspectors opened the ballots of these electors able to read and write,
so as to ascertain their contents before depositing them in the ballot
box. In such manner many votes were obtained for the respondent
which should have been for the petitioner.
"'The names and the listed members of said electors so
influenced unduly and improperly by means of threats are Esteban Pili,
Braulio Azanza, Ricardo Calinao, Dalmacio Buena, Estanislao Sandigon,
and Domingo Palides. There are, besides, other such electors whose
names are at the present time unknown to the petitioner.
"'(d) Said election inspectors did not administer the oath
prescribed by law to such electors as, on account of illiteracy or some
physical defect, solicited their assistance for the preparation of their
ballots.
"'(e) More than 140 persons unqualified as electors were allowed
to vote in that precinct, and their illegal votes were deposited in the
ballot box and counted in the canvass. The names of said persons were
carried on the list of voters of Bato.
"'(f) Said inspectors of election allowed more than 100 persons to
vote after 6 p. m. on the day of the elections — the hour for the closing
of the polls according to law — and their votes were unduly deposited
in the ballot box and afterwards counted in the canvass.
"'(g) The aforementioned election inspectors, acting illegally and
arbitrarily, would not permit the voters among the public nor the
watchers of several candidates to witness the voting, and during the
canvass of the votes these watchers were so situated that they might
not, as in fact they could not, see nor read the contents of the ballots
which were being canvassed; for which reason the herein petitioner
believes, and so alleges, that said election inspectors read during the
canvass the name of the respondent for the office of provincial
governor, although the spaces provided on said ballots for the insertion
of the name of the candidate for said office were filled in with the name
of the petitioner or that of some other person.
"'(h) Several ballots, more than ten in number, were read with
the omission of the name of the candidate voted for provincial governor
notwithstanding the fact that the other blank spaces on said ballots,
provided for candidates for other offices, were filled in, which leads the
petitioner to believe, and he so alleges, that those ballots, or the
majority of them, contained his name for the office of provincial
governor.'
"As may be seen, in the motion, mention is made of several more
or less serious irregularities, and various unlawful acts are complained
of, which constitute violations of law, as much with regard to the
persons who, without possessing the necessary qualifications qualified
as electors and voted, as to the inspectors who knowingly registered
them and permitted them of vote, and said inspectors are accused of
various frauds committed during the course of the elections.
"The court does not need to examine one by one the numerous
proofs presented in support of each one of the allegations of the
motion. Be whatever they may the irregularities that mar an election, if
there has been no fraud on anybody's part, such irregularities, unless
extremely serious, do not void the election; while, on the contrary. the
existence of fraudulent irregularities determines the nullity of the
election, immaterially whether or not they be serious or numerous.
That is the crucial test. Therefore the most advisable procedure, and
the court prefers this course, is to begin by ascertaining whether or not
frauds were committed in the elections held at Bato, and, if they were,
by whom.
"From an examination of the ballots and other documents
introduced in evidence, the court finds:
"That 351 persons were registered on the list of voters, all of
whom voted on the day of the election, the polls being open from 7
o'clock in the morning until 10 o'clock at night; that more than one-half
(180) of the ballots were prepared or filled in by the inspectors, all,
absolutely all, of such ballots being for Manuel Crescini, without a
single vote for any other candidate for governor; that there are 22
ballots written by the inspectors, besides about 8 written by electors,
which were not counted in the canvass, on account of being marked,
which ballots are also for Manuel Crescini, except one, which is for
Andres Garchitorena; that the number of illiterate voters who were
assisted by the inspectors in the preparation of their ballots is 141
only, according to the corresponding statement or list; and that two
ballots disappeared.
"The preceding data, considered jointly with and in relation to all
the other evidence introduced, show nothing but the nature of the
illegal acts denounced in the motion, or, if preferred, irregularities so
grave as to confound themselves with illegalities, and the existence of
the frauds alleged, or, if preferred, discrepancies, excesses, and faults
which do not harmonize with good faith.
"Be it observed, in the first place, that more than one-half of the
ballots (180) were written by the inspectors, while the number of
illiterate voters assisted is 141 only.
"There cannot be the slightest doubt that 180 ballots were
written by the inspectors. The inspectors themselves identified those
that were prepared by them: Eligio Calleja picked out 17 such ballots,
Francisco Relos 60, and Potenciano Orasa 87, making a total of 164, to
which must be added 5 by Calleja, 6 by Relos, and 5 by Orasa, that is,
16 ballots more, making a grand total of 180. (The handwriting expert
identified 6 more ballots as being written by Orasa; but the court is of
the opinion that one of these should be excluded, namely, Ballot No.
149.)
"Now then, if the foregoing facts are true and indisputable, as
they are, for the ballots show them to be so, it is clearly seen that the
list or statement of illiterate voters is false, and that the inspectors
were gravely remiss in the fulfillment of their duty by failing to enter
thereon a considerable number of electors assisted by them. No
explanation whatever can be offered, for it is not a question of
involuntary negligence or oversight, or of a more or less excusable
mistake: it was simply an abandonment of duty, verging on an actual
disdain of the law. Nor is a plea of ignorance admissible, for, in such a
case, no list at all would have been made.
"If on the other hand this statement concerning illiterate voters is
correct, then it is the best proof that the inspectors defrauded the
voters on a large scale by writing out ballot after ballot for illiterate
voters not in existence; and if those ballots were for electors who could
read and write and the candidates voted for on them are really the
same for whom these electors wished to cast their votes, then such
ballots are illegal, for their secrecy was violated.
"The protestee has not invited the attention of the court to a
satisfactory explanation of this serious disagreement between the list
of illiterate voters and the ballots, and the great difference (39 votes)
between 141 incapacitated and 180 assisted voters; and the court
finds no light to attenuate, if not to dissipate completely, the dark
shadows cast upon the elections at Bato by frauds, illegalities, and
irregularities.
"Whether we accept any extreme of the alternatives above
enunciated, or forge other propositions, we shall always find in front of
us in brazen relief in the midst of confusion the execrable figure of
illegality, or perhaps that of fraud, or if preferred that of various
irregularities.
"What are, and what should be done with, the 39 votes (there are
included here the 22 votes of which we shall speak more extensively in
another place) which make up the difference between the 141
incapacitated voters appearing on the corresponding list or statement,
and the 180 ballots written by the inspectors for the illiterate or
assisted voters, is what should be determined, premising, for the
purposes of the discussion of this question, that the inspectors of Bato
complied with the requirement of the law to administer the oath of
incapacity or disability to each one and all of the electors assisted in
the preparation of their respective ballots. Also, for the purposes of the
argument, said list or statement of illiterate voters is presumed and
admitted to be correct and true, inasmuch as if the contrary be
insinuated or maintained, then not only would the 39 votes,
constituting the difference aforementioned, be illegal, but also all the
180 votes written by the three inspectors, with the exception perhaps
of three of them, their own votes.
"In reference to circumstances of the same nature as those
concerned in the instant case, in the case of Gardiner vs. Romulo (26
Phil. Rep., 521), the Supreme Court said:
"'The judgment of the lower court contains the following
comment as to the discrepancies in the reports rendered by the
inspectors of the five precincts of Camiling, in compliance with the
above provisions of law.
"'"First precinct. — according to the record of the illiterate voters
of this precinct, the inspector Marcelino Fabros assisted only three such
persons in the preparation of their ballots, and Eudoxio Masilongan,
twelve. The first named, nevertheless, identified 13 ballots as his,
written in his own handwriting; and the last named, 32. There is an
excess of 30 ballots. It is understood how, for various reasons, a few
names might have been omitted from the list of illiterates, but not
those of thirty voters. Undoubtedly, these inspectors betrayed the
confidence reposed in them, and the ballots written by them merit no
consideration whatever.
"'"Second precinct. — According to the record of illiterate voters,
59 of these were assisted by the inspectors; but the latter identified 77
ballots. There is, therefore, an excess of 18 ballots. Were it a question
of only three or four names, we might say that the election inspectors
forgot to record these three or four names in the list of illiterates,
owing to the haste with which they proceeded in all their acts and to
the large number of voters who requested their assistance; but we do
not believe that those inspectors forgot to enter 18 names. If these
men had actually voted, we believe that their names would have
appeared in the list or record of illiterates. We are of opinion that all
these ballots should be rejected; and as 42 of them were cast for
Romulo and 35 for Gardiner, 42 votes should be deducted from those
obtained by Gregorio Romulo and 35 from those obtained by Ernesto
Gardiner.
"'"Third precinct. — With respect to illiterate voters, Inspector
Juan Guillermo assisted 80 of them. One hundred and nineteen ballots
were identified as having been written by this inspector. Of these 119
ballots, 16 are for Ernesto Gardiner and the rest for Gregorio Romulo.
There is proof that 136 illiterate voters voted in this precinct, all of
them assisted by Juan Guillermo. It is to be presumed that in the ballot
boxes there were 17 more ballots written by this inspector. It must be
taken into account that Juan Guillermo did not identify the ballots
written by himself, but these were identified by his two companions,
inspectors Zacarias Reyes and Pio Salamanca. Of the 136 illiterates, 54
of them testified that they indicated to Juan Guillermo that they wished
to vote for Gardiner for governor. Of the 119 ballots identified as
written by Juan Guillermo, only 16 of them were cast for Gardiner. Juan
Guillermo defrauded the will of 38 voters for Gardiner, and these votes
should be awarded to this candidate and deducted from those obtained
by Gregorio Romulo. The other 83 illiterates who testified all voted for
Gregorio Romulo, which is proved by their own testimony.
"'"Fourth precinct . — With regard to the illiterate voters, 49 of
them were assisted by the election inspectors, but the latter identified
only 41 ballots. There must be a few more ballots that were written by
these inspectors and which could not be identified by them for some
reason or other.
"'"Fifth precinct . — With respect to the illiterates, it is sufficient
to say that, according to the certificate of election, only 73 of them
were assisted by the inspectors, while the chairman of the board
identified 98 ballots as having been written by the inspectors."
"'We do not understand why the court failed to find the
inspectors of the second, third, fourth, and fifth precincts guilty of fraud
by the same line of reasoning which was applied to the inspectors of
the first precinct. In the second precinct the court finds that the
discrepancy between the records of the inspectors and their testimony
could not be explained as an oversight in the keeping of records. As the
discrepancy is only attributable to a willful disregard of the above
quoted provisions of section 22, for no good purpose, their conduct is
on a par with that of the inspectors of the first precinct. The court does
find, in effect, that the inspectors of the third precinct grossly
defrauded the illiterate voters. That, perhaps, is sufficient, without
expressly stating that they were guilty of fraudulent acts. In the fourth
precinct, however, the inspectors' records show that 49 illiterates
voted while they could identify but 41 ballots, a discrepancy of 8. The
explanation is that the inspectors were unable, in eight instances, to
recognize their own handwriting. This explanation is not consistent with
the well known accuracy with which a person can identify his own
handwriting on a document containing as much of it as a ballot at a
general election. The better explanation seems to be that the
inspectors deliberately padded the list of illiterates. In the fifth precinct,
where the court found the inspectors guilty of fraud in other particulars
to such an extent that it was found necessary to annul the returns from
that precinct, there can be no question that the shortage of 25
illiterates on the records of the inspectors was due to fraudulent
practices.'
"This court does not overlook the fact that in the case above
cited there was a very special circumstance which perhaps had a
decisive influence over the minds of the Honorable Justices who
subscribed the decision, to wit, the disappearance of official ballots;
but the legal doctrine enunciated cannot for that reason alone be
inapplicable to the instant case, at least as regards the difference of 39
ballots, the qualification of which is now the subject of our
consideration.
"From all that has been said, it is concluded that at least the 39
votes under discussion are, and should be considered, fraudulent,
which conclusion is at the same time a necessary premise of these
others, to wit: that in the elections held at Bato frauds here committed,
and that these frauds are considerable.
"Who committed them is a matter that requires no further
explanation; it is clear enough. Those frauds were committed by the
election inspectors.
"Examining the records or list of illiterates assisted in the
preparation of their ballots, it is found to be a nominal list of these
electors. Beside each one of the latter's names there were written the
names of the two inspectors who assisted the respective voter; so that
each line contains three names, to wit: that of the elector and those of
each of the two inspectors.
"Now then, if the inspector whose name is the first that appears
on said list is the one who wrote the ballot, and the inspector whose
name follows the first is the witness, we have the result that Eligio
Calleja filled in 58 ballots, Potenciano Orasa 26, and Francisco Relos
44, there being 13 names of electors without any indication whatever
as to who assisted them. If, on the contrary, the second name is that of
the inspector who wrote out the ballot, and the first name is that of the
witness, the result follows that Eligio Calleja filled in 41 ballots, Orasa
73, and Francisco Relos 14, with the same 13 lines in blank where we
should expect to see the names of the inspectors who assisted.
"Comparing the results of this examination with the number of
ballots written by each inspector, many differences will be observed,
for the better appreciation of which the following comparative table is
inserted:
According According According
to ballots. to list, to list,
first name. second name.
Eligio Calleja 22 58 41
Francisco Relos 66 44 14
Potenciano Irasa 92 26 73
In blank 13 13
—— —— ——
180 141 141
"By a mere glance at the preceding table, whether we take the

first name on the list, Eligio Calleja, or the second, as that of the
inspector who filled in the ballot, it will be noticed that the result is
always the same, namely, that the list shows many more ballots as
having been prepared by the inspector than those actually found in the
ballot box as having been written by him.
"In view thereof, it is indisputable that, although it appears
certain that the illiterate electors of Bato duly took the oath of
incapacity before being assisted in writing out their ballots, as so
evidenced by the corresponding record, the statement or list of said
illiterates is nevertheless false, both in regard to the number of the
latter and to the point in reference to which of the three inspectors,
whether one or more, wrote out such electors' respective ballots.
"There is no possible middle ground to be taken, for it has been
certainly ascertained just what ballots were written by these three
inspectors and what proportion of them corresponds to each inspector,
as shown by the ballots themselves. The list of illiterate voters is
therefore necessarily false in all its essential features and deserves no
credence whatever, or clearly shows that the inspectors deliberately
filled it in, with or without fraudulent intent, but with grave violation of
the provisions of law.
"There is another fact that also shows, though indirectly, the
falsity of the list of illiterates and that either certain electors
unnecessarily requested assistance, with violation of the secrecy of the
ballot, or the inspectors in some manner compelled them to allow their
ballots to be filled in.
"The register voters of Bato contains, in conformity with the law,
entries of the qualifications of each elector. The election inspectors
used the letter 'E' placed beside the name of the elector in the proper
column to indicate that the latter had the qualification of education; the
letter 'O,' to indicate that he had held offices such as the law mentions;
and the letter 'P,' if he was a property owner. Now then, an
examination of that register, on an assumption that it is correct and
true in all respects, discloses that 164 electors were registered as
qualified by education, 58 by education and office, 8 by education,
office and property, and 2 by education and property (that is, 232
electors who could read and write), 115 by office, 2 by property, and 2
by office and property (that is, 119 illiterate electors). According to the
ballots however 180 electors were assisted in writing them out. It
would not be strange that some 10, 20, or 30 of the electors able to
read and write should have requested assistance in marking their
ballots, on account of their inability to do so themselves; but 61 (which
is the difference between the 119 illiterate voters and the 180 ballots
written for illiterate voters) is quite a large number which can, and
does in fact, awaken certain suspicion against the legality of the
proceedings conducted by the board of inspectors.
"The result is that not only should the 39 votes of illiterates
which, for the reasons above set forth, are deemed to be fraudulent,
but also all the 180 ballots of illiterates, for the same reasons and
because of the unexplainable discrepancies and inaccuracies which
point to grave irregularities, illegalities, committed by the inspectors.
"Let us consider now, in the second place, the fact that the
voting was prolonged until 10 o'clock at night, there being no more
than 351 voters, 180 of which, or more exactly, 177, were assisted by
the inspectors, and the voting having commenced at the hour fixed by
law, with a complete number of booths.
"The protestant's witnesses calculate that 100, or at least no less
than 90, electors voted after 6 o'clock in the evening while the
witnesses for the protestee estimate at 40 and no more than 50 the
number of such tardy voters. As the voting lasted more than ten hours
and the number of voters was 351, the resultant proportion is at the
rate of not less than 23 electors per hour; so that, under similar
circumstances, as it was so proven, not less than 92 electors, or more
than 28 per cent of the total number of electors entered on the
electoral registry, must have voted between 6 o'clock in the evening
and 10 o'clock at night.
"Be the proportional number 40, as the protestee claims it was,
or 100, according to the protestant's calculations, or 92, as the
proportion was shown to be, it is undeniable that this constitutes at
least an irregularity of relative importance and seriousness, and if this
fact is brought into relation with the fact that several electors without
legal qualification took part in the elections at Bato (the very evidence
produced by the protestee disclosed three such at least, namely, Pablo
Sabao, Faustino Casili, and Santiago Aquino), and with the further fact
of the finding of 30 marked ballots which shall be discussed later on,
the mind is drawn to the conclusion of the existence of other frauds or
illegalities which vitiated the election.
"Considering separately this fact of the prolongation of the voting
until 10 o'clock at night, and regarding it as a mere irregularity, in the
light of the legal provisions and principles in the matter, we find that:
"'At all the elections held under the provisions of this chapter the
polls shall be open from seven o'clock in the morning until six in the
afternoon, during which period not more than one member of the
board of inspectors shall be absent at one time, and then for not to
exceed twenty minutes at one time.' (Administrative Code, Sec. 543
[1916].)
"McCrary says (par. 16.5, McCrary on Elections, 4th ed.):
"'620. From all the somewhat conflicting authorities, upon the
subject, the following may be gathered as the governing rules:
"'1. If the statute fixing the hours during which the polls shall
remain open expressly declares that a failure in this respect shall
render the election void, it must be strictly enforced.
"'2. But in the absence of such a provision in the statute, it will be
regarded as so far directory only, as that, unless the deviation from the
regular hours has affected the result, it will be disregarded.
"'3. If the deviation from the legal hours is great, or even
considerable, the presumption will be that it has affected the result,
and the burden will be upon him who seeks to uphold the election to
show affirmatively that it has not. But if the deviation from the legal
hours is but slight, the presumption will be that it has not affected the
result, and the burden will be upon him who attacks the validity of the
election to show affirmatively the contrary.
"'4. If the number of votes illegally cast after the legal hours, and
the persons for whom cast, can be shown, they be rejected from the
count. (Cited by Villamor, Tratado de Elecciones, par. 620.)
"'628. The same doctrine is maintained in the Cyclopedia of Law
and Procedure (vol. 15, p. 345; Villamor, par. 628):
"The provisions of a statute as to the time of opening and closing
the polls is so far directory that an irregularity in this respect which
does not deprive a legal voter of his vote or admit a disqualified person
to vote will not vitiate the election. But if the departure from the
provisions of the statute in regard to the time for opening or closing the
polls was so great that it must be deemed to have affected the result,
the election must be held invalid."
"In view of the legal principles above cited, the court declares
that, if he had to decide this case, with only this irregularity to
consider, in connection with the 730 majority votes cast for the
protestee in the entire province, or with the 260 majority votes over
the number obtained by the protestant in the precinct of Bato, without
any doubt the court would not hesitate in according no importance
whatever to that irregularity, although it is obvious that it is not a
question of but a slight inobservance of the legal hours, nor one where
only a small number of votes were illegally cast.
"But such is not the case; the relation must be established
between that irregularity and all the facts brought out at the trial,
especially the illegalities and frauds alleged and proven in respect to
the municipality of Bato. And it has already been said that in that
municipality the election inspectors committed frauds whereby 180
votes were affected. It must also be taken into account that there is
evidence which shows that some persons without the requisite
qualifications were registered in the register of voters and though
challenged voted in this election, some of them precisely during the
night.
"Furthermore, there is even no need to seek relationship with
other facts disclosed at the trial, in order to hold that these votes cast
out of time are invalid; it is sufficient to pause a short while to consider:
(a) that Andres Garchitorena obtained in Bato not a single vote cast by
an illiterate, by any voter assisted by the inspectors, which means that
the few who voted for him all knew how to read and write, and there
are reasons to purpose and believe that they knew the law, at least in
so far as it refers to the opening and closing of the polls, and must have
voted during the legal hours; and (b), that the total number of votes for
Garchitorena (32) does not even reach the minimum calculation (40) of
the votes illegally cast, from which it is to be inferred that the election
was not prolonged until 10 o'clock at night in order to admit the 32
votes for Garchitorena or the very few votes for the other candidates
for governor, but principally and especially in order to afford an
opportunity to vote to all the registered electors, without a single
exception, who were known to be all of them partisans of the protestee
Manuel Crescini.
"The procedure of the inspectors of Bato is in very noticeable
contrast with that of those of the neighboring town of Nabua who found
but little difficulty in consulting the provincial fiscal in the matter and in
following strictly his decision in the premises, namely, to close the polls
at 6 o'clock in the evening, notwithstanding that there were still 80
voters who had not cast their ballots, because these electors were
perhaps partisans of the protestant Garchitorena (in Nabua,
Garchitorena had 164 votes as against 110 cast for Crescini), or at
least were not electors who would surely vote for Crescini.
"Four hours of prolongation of the voting is more than a slight
inobservance of the law, and 92 votes, or if preferred 40, are in reality
a considerable number. The result is that these votes illegally cast
should be thrown out, if they could be determined both as regards their
numbers and their contents; but as this cannot be done, in view of the
other irregularity committed by the inspectors in not enumerating
successively each elector who voted, in conformity with the
instructions clearly written on the election lists, it follows that we find
ourselves confronted with a serious irregularity of such a nature as to
make it impossible to separate the legal votes from the illegal ones.
"In the third place, it is to be noticed that, besides, 30 filled-in
ballots were found in the ballot boxes, none of which ballots pertained
to any elector; 22 of them were written in different proportions by the
inspectors and 8 by electors; all of them were duly marked for the
purpose of their rejection. There is the peculiarity that on one of these
ballots, that numbered 353, there appears the imprint or trace left in
writing the sign X as a mark in the middle of ballot No. 352, thus clearly
showing that the ballot No. 353 was under the ballot No. 352 when this
mark was written.
"No explanation whatever is given in regard to the existence of
these ballots, either in the record of the proceedings by the board of
inspectors, or in the evidence produced by the protestee, and the court
finds no fact, detail, or circumstance which may justify the existence of
such ballots so filled-in, marked, and rejected.
"Why it is that the inspector Francisco Relos had 18 ballots left
over (Nos. 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361, 362, 363,
366, 367, 368, 370, 371, and 372), Eligio Calleja three (Nos. 343, 348
and 351), and Potenciano Orasa one (No. 346), all filled in or prepared,
is what the court proposes to ascertain, for, if it does not constitute
fraud, it is undoubtedly an irrefutable proof of fraud.
"The same inquiry will be made in reference to the eight other
extra ballots filled in or prepared by different electors and which are
numbered 344, 345, 346, 347, 349, 350, 365, and 369.
"No record was kept of the spoiled ballots in the proper column or
in any other place of the registry list, opposite the name of the
respective voter, as provided in Section 551 of the Administrative
Code, 1916.
"It should be kept in mind that these 30 ballots were rejected by
the inspectors for the very reason that they were left over; and that
they could not correspond to any registered elector because their
numbers were completely crossed out.
"Apparently the inspectors of Bato, or some one of them at least,
meant to say, in speaking of these 30 marked ballots, that they were
duplicates, because in each case the elector amended his vote, and it
was thought necessary to mark the changed ballot in order to
invalidate it.
"Accepting this as true, the result would be that 18 illiterate
voters assisted by inspector Relos, 3 by inspector Calleja, 1 by Orasa,
and 8 electors who could read and write, amended their votes,
immediately after their ballots had been filled in, each requesting for
the purpose a second ballot. Now then, those amendments either were
made at the elector's own will, or they were not; if it be the first, in the
case of the illiterate voters, it was either because the elector made a
mistake in dictating the names of his candidates or in specifying the
respective offices, or because the inspector deliberately committed
such mistakes and the elector would not accept the ballot as his own,
immediately asking for another one.
"The court cannot believe in the supposed error on the part of
the illiterate voter or of the voter who could read and write, committed
in dictating or writing the names of his candidates. There is no
evidence sustaining such supposition. If an amendment or change of
his vote was agreed upon, it was the result of the effective
electioneering which must have been carried on during the time the
ballot was being written, or immediately after it had been written upon
and its contents had become known, for such is the conclusion derived
from some of the evidence taken.
"What most likely occurred with respect to the 22 ballots written
by the inspectors is that the latter had them already prepared for the
illiterate electors but calculated so poorly the number there might be
of such voters that several of the ballots were left over and they had to
mark them as spoiled. These ballots so prepared beforehand were
assembled together one on top of the other and were arranged in this
way when were thrown out as spoiled; this fact explains that the
imprint or trace of the mark placed on Ballot No. 352 became fixed on
the next ballot below it, No. 353; it is also an explanation of why the
inspector Orasa had only one ballot left over; of all the inspectors it
was he who was able to dispose of the largest number (92) of
previously prepared ballots.
"In one case or the other, it may be clearly seen that it is a
matter of the same illegality under different forms; consequently the
existence of the 30 perfectly good but deliberately marked ballots, if
not in itself a fraud is an other manifest proof that fraud was
committed or attempted to be committed.
"That all these ballots excepting one are for the protestee, does
not alter the conclusion drawn, inasmuch as it is indifferent whether
the vote was amended in regard to one office or to another. The fact is
that the elector was unduly influenced or obliged by electioneering to
make a change in one or more of his candidates. Ballot No. 364, the
only one of those marked as spoiled, that is, for Andres Garchitorena,
must have been substituted by another already written by an
inspector, without the knowledge or the consent of the elector who
filled in the substituted ballot.
"In the fourth place, let the following facts be observed, as
disclosed by the returns made by the inspectors and by the recount
effected by the commission.
"According to the returns, the results of the election for the office
of governor is as follows:
Votes.
Manuel Crescini 292
Andres Garchitorena 32
Engracio Imperial 7
Severo Cea 1
——
332
Scattering votes 10
——
342
According to the recount and the ballots

themselves:
Votes.
Manuel Crescini had only 289
Various other candidates 20
"It may be admitted that it is very common and easy to err in
making a canvass of votes, and that the counting of 292 instead of 289
ballots, 32 instead of 33, and 18 instead of 20, may have been done
through mistake; but it is a very conspicuous and noticeable fact that,
with respect to Manuel Crescini, the inspectors should have made the
mistake of awarding him more votes than he should have had, while on
the other hand, with regard to the other candidates, who certainly
received but very few votes, the contrary should have occurred. If this
is not fraud, it is nevertheless circumstantial evidence of it or sufficient
proof that the inspectors of Bato were very prone to commit mistakes
in favor of Crescini.
"Having reached the conclusions above set forth, to wit: that the
election inspectors of Bato committed frauds of considerable
importance in the preparation of the ballots, and that they obtained, by
electioneering and by other still more censurable means, changes in
the votes of several electors; that the legal hours were not observed,
the voting being prolonged four hours beyond the time prescribed by
law for the closing of the polls, during which period a considerable
number of electors cast their votes; and that the inspectors did not
enumerate successively each elector who voted, on account of which
omission it is impossible to separate the ballots illegally cast from the
good and unchallenged ones; the court does not deem it necessary to
enter upon further considerations with regard to the other questions
brought up in the motion and in the evidence, bearing upon
irregularities with reference to the polling place, the voting booths, the
procedure adopted by the inspectors with respect to the electors who
were awaiting their return, the watchers, and the canvass of the votes.
"It is enough to say that there is some evidence which shows
that the polling place and voting booths at Bato and the procedure
adopted by the election inspectors are really very far from being
perfect enough to serve as models or at least to be in accord with the
letter and spirit of the law.
"It is not unknown to the court that the electors of the
municipality of Bato are in their great majority, if not nearly all of them,
partisans of the protestee Manuel Crescini, and that many of them,
principally the illiterates, went to the polls to cast their votes in the
most honorable manner, and that they had absolutely no hand
whatever in the frauds, illegalities, and irregularities above referred to.
"The court would have the votes of the honest electors of Bato
respected for the reason that they constitute the expression and
fulfillment of their right of suffrage, and would not deprive anybody,
though it be the most humble and illiterate citizen, of the enjoyment of
said right; but it is found in such a situation that his desires to give
effect to the suffrage of the electorate of Bato are shattered in the face
of barriers, rocks, and boulders scattered during the elections, in the
shape of irregularities, illegalities, and frauds, by the election
inspectors.
"The result is that the elections held in the sole election precinct
of the municipality of Bato should be repudiated.
"The measure is extreme and severe, as no one will doubt, but in
view of all the proven facts, of the law and legal doctrines applicable,
and of all the circumstances of the case, the court is fully convinced
that it is the only just one that should be adopted.
"Adopting in this case of Bato the principle or rule according to
which the fraudulent and illegal votes should be rejected, separating
them from the good ones to give the latter force and effect, practically
the same result would be reached, inasmuch as the 180 ballots written
by the inspectors for illiterates, the 92 ballots illegally cast outside of
the legal hours, and the 135 ballots of unqualified electors, the legality
of which is at least doubtful (the court has not gone into any lengthy
discussion concerning them, but there is proof that some of them are
in fact illegal ballots) aggregate more than the total of all the votes
cast in the precinct of Bato.
"In conclusion, the court holds that the election held in the sole
and only precinct of Bato is null and void, rejects the returns, and takes
no account of them in the general canvass of the votes cast in the
entire province.
"Municipality of Buhi.
"With respect to this municipality the motion presented alleges
the following grounds, to wit:
"'(a) That the election inspectors of this precinct, Gregorio
Ricafranca, Jose Crescini, and Dalmacio Amador, on the day of the
general elections held on the 6th of the present month, refused to
admit to the polls the petitioner's watchers and the candidates who
requested permission to witness the voting, and permitted them only
to be present at the canvass of the votes, at a distance of more than
three meters in front of the table occupied by the board where they
were stationed by said inspectors, notwithstanding that such watchers
and candidates had requested to be placed behind the table and at a
reasonable distance therefrom to enable them to see and read the
ballots to be counted; so that it was impossible for them to see or to
read the ballots that were being read, or to observe their state and
condition.
"'(b) That, at the commencement of and during the voting, said
inspectors denied the public access to the polling station and to any
place within a radius of 30 meters therefrom, with the exception of the
electors who went there to vote; the latter were called, six at a time,
from the 30 meter line where they had assembled and from there went
pellmell, each trying to get ahead of the other.
"'(c) That the aforementioned inspectors did, within the polling
place and the voting booths, unduly influence the electors, threaten
and force them in order that they might vote for the candidate the
inspectors favored, the herein respondent Manuel Crescini.
"'(d) That when electors who could read and write entered the
booths to vote, said inspectors followed them within to see them
prepare and be present during the preparation of their ballots, to
influence, threaten, and force them to vote for the respondent; and
whenever they saw that the candidate voted for governor was the
herein petitioner, they immediately spoiled the ballot, crossing it with a
pencil, and forthwith substituted it by another ballot, warning the
elector that he should vote for the respondent.

"'(e) That said inspectors prepared the ballots of the illiterate
electors without inquiring of or consulting them as to whom they
desired to vote for governor, and whenever any of them presented a
ticket or a list of their candidates, said inspectors improperly
influenced, threatened, and forced them to vote for the respondent or,
in the case of electors who could not read at all, entirely disregarded
their wishes.
"'That the electors who were influenced by threats, as stated in
this and in the preceding paragraphs (c), (d), and (e), are Luciano
Ibanita, Dimas Noy, Eleno Peñaranda, Santiago Fabricante, Lorenzo
Peñaranda, Bruno Santo Tomas, and others at this moment unknown to
the petitioner.
"'(f) That when some illiterate electors went to vote, they
received from said inspectors ballots that had been previously
prepared or filled in.
"'(g) That said inspectors themselves, after preparing the ballots
of the illiterates, folded them without first showing their contents to
said voters, and immediately thereupon ordered the latter to leave the
polls; so that these voters could neither see the contents of their
ballots nor know whether the same were or were not placed in the
ballot box.
"'(h) That said inspectors prepared the ballots of the illiterate
voters and of those physically unable to write, without first requiring of
and administering to them the oath prescribed by law.
"'(i) That, because of the fact that the aforesaid inspectors would
not permit the petitioner's watchers and those of other candidates to
see, read, and observe the ballots which said inspectors were counting,
the petitioner believes, and so alleges, that said inspectors
fraudulently read the name of the respondent in the space provided for
the entry of the name of the candidate for the office of provincial
governor in some ballots, although in them and in said space there
appeared written the petitioner's name or that of some other
candidate.
"'(j) That said inspectors received from the municipal treasurer of
the aforementioned municipality of Buhi 467 blank ballots, and as only
350 electors voted and up to this date said inspectors have not
delivered to the municipal secretary of said municipality the extra or
unused ballots, they have manifestly violated the law.
"'(k) That each one and all of said inspectors were and are ardent
partisans of the respondent, and prior to the elections worked and
electioneered for him, taking undue advantage of their positions as
such election inspectors.
"'(l) In this precinct no guard rail as required by law was
constructed and which should have been placed at least two meters
from the ballot box and from the voting booths; the sides of these
booths were closed with white cloth, and cloth hung on the side of the
entrance served as doors, in such manner that it could easily be seen
how the electors prepared their ballots.'
"The proofs presented by both parties with respect to this,
municipality are comparatively numerous, and divers questions of fact
have been brought up therein, but those that the court considers to be
the principal ones, upon the determination of which the judgment to be
rendered in this case depends, are comprised in the following
propositions, to wit:
"1. Whether or not the election inspectors of Buhi worked and
electioneered in behalf of the protestee during and prior to the day of
the elections, within and without the polling place.
"2. Whether or not said inspectors, availing themselves of their
office and making use of censurable means, worked, to the end that
the electors capable of reading and writing should vote, in filling out
their ballots for the candidates supported by these inspectors.
"3. Whether or not said inspectors defrauded or attempted to
defraud illiterate electors of their votes.
"4. Whether or not they failed to comply with the requirement to
administer the oath of incapacity to the illiterate voters before assisting
them in the preparation of their ballots.
"5. Whether or not on the canvass they fraudulently read certain
ballots in order to favor the protestee.
"Having examined these propositions one by one in the light of
the evidence produced, principally the documentary, and of the ballots
themselves, the court finds with displeasure that the preponderance of
such evidence rather lies on the affirmative side of the propositions
than on the negative, with the exception of Proposition No. 4.
"(1) There can be no doubt that the election inspectors of Buhi
did in fact work and electioneer in behalf of the protestee, during and
prior to the elections, both within and without the polling place. The
evidence on this point is quite clear and conclusive, but justice requires
the statement that not all the three inspectors worked and
electioneered to that end with the same activity and to the same
extent.
"(2) Properly speaking, there is no complete and conclusive
evidence that the three election inspectors of Buhi, availing
themselves of their office and making use of censurable means, did
work to the end that the electors capable of reading and writing would
vote, in filling out their ballot, for the protestee Manuel Crescini for the
office of provincial governor; but there is positive and decisive
evidence that the inspector Jose Crescini did proceed in that manner,
although it was only in the case of a few electors.
"Such activity on the part of Jose Crescini is shown in the most
evident manner by the ballot cast by Lorenzo Peñacerrada (Exhibit A),
those of Santiago Fabricante (Exhibits B and C), that of Balbino San
Luis (Exhibit E), those of Felipe Estanislao (Exhibits F and G), and by
the ballots Nos. 185, 195, 198, 199, and 249.
"The first of these ballots, Exhibit A, is one that was smashed by
the elector Lorenzo Peñacerrada. While he was filling it out in the
booth, Jose Crescini entered therein and, on seeing him vote for
another candidate, threatened to spoil his ballot unless he voted for
the protestee; soPeñacerrada in despair smashed his ballot, wherefore
it was thrown out as spoiled.
"Santiago Fabricante had two ballots (Exhibits B and C) because
the first one was spoiled by Jose Crescini by erasing or trying to erase
the name of Engracio Imperial, candidate for governor, immediately
whereafter he handed to Fabricante a second ballot which precisely
was filled in by himself, as regards the office of governor, allowing this
elector to complete it afterwards or write in it the names of the
candidates he choose for the other offices.
"The ballot Exhibit E, cast by Balbino San Luis, was torn in its
upper edge because of Jose Crescini's attempt to snatch it away from
the voter in order to see its contents, and there was resistance on the
latter's part.
"Felix Estanislao is another elector who had two ballots (Exhibits
F and G), for, after he had duly filled in the first one and when he was
about to cast it into the ballot box, the inspector Crescini obliged
Estanislao to show it to him and, having seen that Manuel Crescini was
not voted for governor, the inspector had the ballot changed for
another and spoiled the first one by the superscription of other letters
or names over those written in all the spaces allotted for the names of
the candidates for the offices of municipal president and councilors.
(See Exhibits f-1, f-2, f-3, and f-4, which are photographs taken of the
ballot Exhibit F.)
"This evidence shows in an indubitable manner that one of the
inspectors, Jose Crescini, did avail himself of his office and, making use
of censurable means, did work to the end that some electors capable
of reading and writing would, in filling out their ballots, vote for the
protestee, Manuel Crescini.
"Furthermore, these facts are proven by the oral evidence
contained in the record; but, as the court deems the documentary
evidence sufficient and very convincing, he sees no need of a more or
less longer discussion of said oral evidence.
"(3) The court does not hold it to have been proven that the
inspector Gregorio Ricafranca defrauded or attempted to defraud
illiterate electors of their votes. He is in doubt with respect to the
inspector Dalmasio Amador, but is fully convinced that the inspector
Jose Crescini not only attempted to defraud illiterate electors of their
votes, but actually did defraud some of them.
"As in the discussion of the preceding proposition, the court gives
preference to the documentary evidence, and particularly to the ballots
themselves; the latter therefore will be principally referred to in
connection of course with all the other proofs adduced.
"The three inspectors, Gregorio Ricafranca, Dalmacio Amador,
and Jose Crescini, identified 34, 28, and 44 ballots as having been
prepared by them respectively for illiterate voters. The handwriting
expert who testified in behalf of the protestant identified 8, 21, and 20
other ballots as also having been written respectively by the same
inspectors, excepting some two or four of them which ballots the latter
afterwards admitted that they did write.
"Of the 34 or 42 ballots written by the inspector Gregorio
Ricafranca for illiterate electors, not a single one of them was for the
protestant Andres Garchitorena: they were all for the protestee Manuel
Crescini. This fact perhaps might arouse suspicion against the honesty
of this inspector, but the court finds no positive evidence to warrant
such a suspicion.
"There was one witness, Nazario Saballa, 54 years of age, who
testified having been assisted by Gregorio Ricafranca and that he was
not questioned as to whom he was going to vote for, but that his
candidate for governor was Andres Garchitorena. However, the court
does not give much importance to the testimony of this witness,
inasmuch as on cross-examination, when he was asked why he had not
protested against such procedure on the part of the inspector, he
replied that he did not do it for the reason that it was the first time that
he had voted, and when afterwards questioned as to how old he was,
he made no reply. Evidently he saw that he was caught and recognized
that the reason he gave was inadmissible, he being, as he was, 53
years of age, which age he wished to conceal by his silence. Besides, it
was not proven that it was the first time he had voted, nor why he was
not a voter in previous elections.
"With respect to Dalmacio Amador, although there is some
evidence against him, the court however considers it insufficient to
convict this inspector of fraud beyond all doubt.
"Five illiterates testified that they were electors who supported
the protestant Andres Garchitorena and that they were assisted by
Dalmacio Amador in the preparation of their ballot. of the ballots
written by this inspector, only three are found in favor of the
protestant; there is therefore a difference of two. Notwithstanding, the
court cannot consider this as conclusive proof that Dalmacio Amador
defrauded illiterate electors of at least two votes, inasmuch as the
witnesses presented as such are in fact illiterate and extremely
ignorant and their testimony is inconsistent in several of its details and
does not convince the court beyond all reasonable doubt.
"It is a different matter as regards Jose Crescini, with respect to
whom the evidence is conclusive. From an examination of the ballots
prepared by this inspector for illiterate electors, the court finds that of
the 64 ballots written by him, in so far as the office of municipal
president is concerned, 50 are for Infante, 4 for Trinidad, 1 for Nobleza,
and 9 are in blank; that two of the ballots for Infante (Nos. 192 and
208) show erasures to have been made on them, it being noticed
however at a simple glance that the name of Angel Trinidad or that of
Alejandro Nobleza was erased and that of Hilario Infante was written in
place thereof; that in two of the four ballots for Trinidad (Nos. 209 and
225) the latter's name was written very faintly, only the slightest
pressure being applied in writing it, just as was done with respect to
the other candidates voted for in the other ballots, with the manifest
purpose of enabling the writing easily to be erased and substituting in
place of it the name of Hilario Infante, as was done in ballots Nos. 192
and 208; and that, of the 9 ballots in blank five of them, Nos. 187, 190,
193, 214, and 219 bear the name of Angel Trinidad on the second of
the lines intended for the names of members of the council, while in
two other ballots, Nos. 179 and 227, said Angel Trinidad was voted for
municipal vice-president, notwithstanding that he was not a candidate
for either office; all of which clearly shows that it was Crescini's
intention to take away from or spoil votes for Angel Trinidad by leaving
in blank the space left for the insertion of the name of the candidate for
the office of municipal president, and in other cases by not writing the
name of said Angel Trinidad anywhere on the ballot, and in still other
ballots by placing it in the space allotted for the candidate chosen for
vice-president, and in the rest, in that intended for the name of
member [of the provincial board].
"It is true that these proofs refer principally if not exclusively, as
may be seen, to offices other than that of Provincial Governor. the
subject matter of this protest; but it is also true that they show at least
the isolated fact that the inspector Jose Crescini defrauded or
attempted to defraud illiterate electors of their votes; and it is likewise
true that the parties in this case stipulated that the evidence adduced
in the matter of the contested municipal elections of Buhi should have
its due bearing on this contested provincial election, in so far as the
legality or illegality of the manner of conducting said municipal
elections is concerned.
"Moreover, that Jose Crescini did the same with respect to the
office of provincial governor is disclosed by the testimony of twelve
witnesses who testified that they intended to vote for the protestant,
Andres Garchitorena, and that they were assisted by Jose Crescini in
the preparation of their ballots; however, of the 64 ballots written by
this inspector, not a single one of them is for Andres Garchitorena.
"(4) Notwithstanding the testimony of some witnesses to the
contrary, the court believes that the election inspectors of Buhi did not
fail to comply with the requirement to administer the oath of incapacity
to the illiterate electors before assisting them in the preparation of
their ballots or, in other words, that they endeavored to comply, and
did comply, with said legal requirements.
"The documents Exhibit I, concerning the lake Buhi elections,
presented by the protestant himself, so shows.
"But it is contended that this document is false, from the fact
that the words 'and he took oath before the board, as I, the secretary,
so certify,' recorded at the end of each entry, were written
subsequently, that is to say that the contents of said document was
altered by the addition of the above-quoted words at some time
subsequent to the preparation of the document.
"It is true that such alteration or addition is manifest, principally
on the first pages, but this, far from proving the falsity of the fact, that
is, that the assisted elector did not take oath before the board,
precisely evidences the contrary, namely, that he actually did what is
stated he did in the added words and he took oath before the board.'
"It is a known fact, and one not discussed, that Exhibit I is one of
the several documents which were found in the ballot box and
afterwards removed therefrom. It is also an uncontroverted fact that
the ballot boxes of Buhi were not violated, and therefore the
documents which they contained were found, as they should have
been, in the same condition in which they were when the ballot boxes
were closed immediately after the elections.
"If this is so, we can clearly grasp the explanation of the reason
for the subsequent addition of the words 'and he took oath before the
board, which I, the secretary, so certify,' and it is that at first the
secretary did not record this fact, although the oath was administered,
but later, on the revision of this list or statement of assisted illiterate
electors, it was deemed advisable and necessary to make record of the
fact, as was done. This explanation is in some manner corroborated by
the context of the last entries. In these it is seen that the names of the
illiterate voters were successively put down without, at the time,
writing in what follows them, and this was done undoubtedly to enable
the registry of the names of all the electors who requested assistance
of the inspectors; and as soon as the secretary had some time at his
disposal for the purpose, he continued the entries until he had finished
them, and also corrected the first entries by adding the words 'and he
took oath before the board, which I, the secretary, so certify.'
"And why did he add these words? Without any doubt whatever,
it was because the explanations above given are the facts that actually
occurred, as confirmed by the entries made on the last pages where
the fact of the administration of the oath is not recorded as an addition,
but as an integral part of the text of the respective entry.
"The supposition on the part of the protestant that said addition
was made after the initiation of the proceedings in this election
contest, is unfounded in view of the fact that the ballot boxes were not
tampered with.
"Furthermore, for the very reason that the document Exhibit I is
not false, it necessarily follows that the apparent inaccuracy of the
same with respect to the number of illiterates assisted is not actually
the fact, and this feature will be examined later on. The inaccuracy lies
on the part of the inspectors who wrote ballots for electors whom they
supposed were illiterates, while they were not. In fact the inspectors
admitted having written 156 ballots — 152. if some four are excepted,
the preparation of which was not thoroughly explained — and, as may
be seen, this number exceeds by 59 or 55 the number of electors who
were assisted, according to Exhibit I.
"It is advisable, however, to consider this difference separately,
that is, to distribute it among each one of the three inspectors.
According to the list of illiterates, Exhibit I, the inspector Gregorio
Ricafranca assisted 40, Dalmacio Amador 18, and Jose Crescini 39,
which numbers, compared with those of the ballots prepared by them,
to wit, 42, 50, and 64 respectively give the following differences: 2, 32,
and 25.
"With respect to Gregorio Ricafranca, the difference is rather
apparent than real, for, taking into account what has already been said
of this inspector in the discussion of the preceding propositions and
considering also that no thorough explanation was made of the manner
of preparation of some two ballots which the handwriting expert said
were written by Ricafranca, aside from the fact that the latter cast one
ballot of his own, it will be seen that there is no such difference, and
that as above said the statement of the illiterates is correct.
"Another proof of the correctness of the list Exhibit I is the very
inaccuracy of the ballots, in so far as they concern the inspectors
Dalmacio Amador and Jose Crescini, inasmuch as the differences are 32
and 25 respectively or, more properly, 31 and 24 (the illiterates
assisted by them and whose names do not appear on the list Exhibit I),
and such differences are too large to allow of their being satisfactorily
explained as the result of an error or neglect on their part and that of
the poll clerk.
"Taking due account of the frauds that were proven to have been
committed by the inspector Jose Crescini, the court does not hesitate
to affirm that the 24 ballots supposed to have been cast by illiterates
are just so many fraudulent votes.
"With regard to Dalmacio Amador, the court has stated that he
doubted whether this inspector did or did not defraud illiterate electors
of their votes; but in view of so great a difference (31) between the
ballots written by him and those written by the electors whose names
appear on the list Exhibit I and who, as shown by the latter, were
assisted by him, the court is obliged to hold that these 31 votes are at
least more fraudulent than legal and their admission is unwarranted.
"And said fraudulent ballots were without any doubt cast by
these inspectors, in favor of the protestee Manuel Crescini inasmuch as
the ballots found to have been cast for the protestant Andres
Garchitorena, from among those prepared by Dalmacio Amador, are
insufficient even to cover the number of votes of the few illiterate
electors who stated that they voted for Garchitorena. There is no need
to speak of the ballots written by Jose Crescini; they are all for Manuel
Crescini; none of them are for Andres Garchitorena. Consequently, if a
deduction of these ballots is to be made as should be done they should
be deducted from the votes awarded to Manuel Crescini.
"As gathered from the decision by the Supreme Court of these
Islands, rendered in the case of Gardiner vs. Romulo (26 Phil. Rep.,
521) it appears that all the ballots prepared by the inspectors who
betrayed the confidence reposed in them should be rejected. But it
should be noticed that in that case there was a circumstance which
made it is impossible to determine what votes were fraudulent,
because, as stated in that decision, the influence of the circumstance
referred to was widespread, so that it was impossible to separate the
good votes from the bad.
"The decision above mentioned cites the following doctrine laid
down in the case of Martin vs. McGarr (27 Okla., 653):
"'While a contestant in an election may always object to the
counting and consideration of fraudulent or illegal votes, yet the
reception of the same will in no instance result in the avoidance of the
election except where the entire poll is so tainted that the good votes
cannot be separated from the bad, and it is impossible to ascertain for
whom the majority of the valid ballots were cast. The general rule
obtaining throughout all the States of the Union is that an election is
not to be held invalid except as a last resort, the correct doctrine being
announced by Judge Brewster, in the case of Batturs vs. McGary (1
Brewster, 162), as follows: "The courts have the power to reject an
entire poll, but only in the extremest case — as where it is impossible
to ascertain the true vote. Impossibility is the test."'
"In the present case, as the court deems it possible to separate
the good votes from the bad, he does not see the need to resort to the
extreme measure of rejecting or throwing out all the ballots prepared
by these inspectors, and therefore chooses to follow the rule
enunciated in the case of Martin vs. McGarr.
"(5) That in the canvass of the ballots some of these were
fraudulently read by the inspectors of Buhi for the purpose of favoring
the protestee is disclosed merely by examining the returns and
comparing them with the result obtained by the recount.
"The inspectors must have read 280 ballots in favor of the
protestee, inasmuch as the returns show that the latter was awarded
280 votes; but according to the recount there were no more than 270
for this candidate. including the 67 challenged. Were it a difference of
but two or three votes, the explanation might be accepted that such
discrepancy came from an error or an involuntary oversight; but there
are ten votes, and it is hard to believe that the inspectors were
mistaken ten times and each and every time in favor of the protestee.
"However, it is immaterial whether the number be large or small;
its mere existence is enough to prove that the inspectors, in making
the canvass, fraudulently read certain ballots for the purpose of
favoring the protestee.
"Moreover, it will be noticed what kind of an error it is, if account
is taken of the fact that these inspectors also made mistakes with
respect to the votes obtained by the protestant Andres Garchitorena,
but they did just the opposite by awarding him 12 votes less than those
he obtained, for according to the return made by said inspectors, he
had only 39 votes, while this candidate was voted for in 51 ballots.
"As stated hereinabove, and as may be seen in the part of the
motion transcribed at the beginning of the preceding considerations
concerning the elections at Buhi, various other irregularities were
charged regarding which evidence was given at the trial, among them
those in reference to the conditions of the voting booths, to the
conduct observed by the election inspectors towards the voters while
the latter were awaiting their turn, and to the watchers, principally
during the canvassing of the ballots.
"The court also finds that these allegations of the motion are in a
certain way proven; and though the record disclosed no positive proof
of frauds committed, these irregularities would contribute, as they do
to a large extent, to fortify the idea of the existence of frauds
suggested by the illegalities above enumerated.
"Coming now to the recount made of the ballots cast for the
candidates for the office of provincial governor in the general elections
held in the municipality of Buhi on June 6, 1916, for the purpose of
separating the legal votes from the fraudulent and inadmissible ones
after giving due regard to the objections formulated by the parties, the
court holds that the following votes should be, as they hereby are,
awarded to the herein protestant and protestee, excluding the other
candidates voted for:
"According to the recount made by the commissioner appointed,
270 votes were obtained by Manuel Crescini and 51 by Andres
Garchitorena.
"From the 270 votes for Manuel Crescini, the following should be
deducted:
31 votes written by Dalmacio Amador for illiterates whose names
are not on the list.
24 votes written by Jose Crescini for illiterates whose names are
not on the list.
12 votes of electors assisted by this inspector, which do not
appear among the ballots.
6 votes, ballots Nos. 185, 195, 198, 199, 249, and Exhibit C, in
which the name of the candidate for the office of governor was written
by Jose Crescini, and those of the candidates for the other offices by
the elector.
1 vote, ballot No. 117, because it bears the name of Crescini in
two spaces.
1 vote, ballot No. 241, in which Crescini is voted for, but not for
governor. 1 vote, No. 246. The space allotted for the name of the
candidate for governor was left in blank.
1 vote, No. 247, M. C. only.
2 votes, Nos. 255 and 322. Illegible.
3 votes, Nos. 248, 253, and 263. Not for Crescini for governor.
1 vote, No. 251. Illegible and does not show the name of any
candidate for governor.
1 vote, No. 266. Marked.
(All the other ballots objected to are admitted.) 84 votes.
"Consequently, Manuel Crescini is awarded 270 votes less 84,
that is, 186 votes.
"To the 51 votes for Andres Garchitorena there is to be added
one (ballot No. 321), which was cast for him and contains no flaw
whatever. This candidate, therefore, is awarded 52 votes.
"Municipality of Calabanga.
"The following facts are recited in the motion, in connection with
the elections held in this municipality of Calabanga:
upper floor of the municipal building, and to reach it high stairs had to
be climbed. The voting booths were not entirely closed on their four
sides, as the law requires they shall be; so that any person inside the
polling place could see everything that was done in said booths. No
guard rail as provided by law was erected in the polling place.
"'(b) About the month of last April, the municipal council of this
municipality of Calabanga duly appointed Manuel Sabido, Justo
Bordado, and Ramon Malanyaon as election inspectors. As Justo
Bordado was not a partisan in favor of the respondent's candidacy, his
appointment was vigorously opposed by the latter and to the extreme
that Governor Fuentebella, one of the principal and most rabid
supporters of the respondent's candidacy, suspended from office the
municipal president and a majority of the municipal council of
Calabanga, solely because said municipal officials favored the
appointment of, Justo Bordado as election inspector. Later on this
appointment was judicially brought into question, and the justice of the
peace court of this capital, delegated to try the case in lieu of the Court
of First Instance, sustained and affirmed the legality of said
appointment in its decision under date of April 27th last, which
decision has not been appealed. Therefore Justo Bordado took
possession of his office as election inspector for Calabanga and acted
as such in the five sessions of the board of inspectors, held for the
registration of voters and for the inclusion and exclusion of voters, as
required in each case, pursuant to law. But the respondent, in his
eager desire to have all the election inspectors of Calabanga on his
side so that he might better carry out his fraudulent plans on the day
of the election, did not stop until he saw Justo Bordado separated from
his office and substituted by one of the respondent's partisans. In fact,
on the afternoon of the 5th instant, the day before the election, the
respondent availing himself of his confederate and protector, Governor
Fuentebella, threatened to prosecute civilly and criminally said Justo
Bordado unless he resigned from office, and the latter, thus
intimidated, signed his resignation which had previously been prepared
by Governor Fuentebella who was himself the bearer. The reason
Bordado gave for resigning was ill-health, but in fact he was not ill. As
soon as this resignation was signed, Governor Fuentebella forthwith
called a special session of the municipal council of Calabanga for the
purposes of accepting the resignation and appointing, as in fact said
council did appoint that same afternoon one Toribio Felipe, a partisan
of the respondent, in substitution of the resigning inspector. By these
base intrigues the respondent accomplished what he so ardently
desired, to wit, that all the inspectors of Calabanga be from among the
members of his own political party.
"'(c) That the election inspectors Toribio Felipe, Manuel Sabido,
and Roman Malanyaon, and the poll clerk of the board of inspectors,
called Valeriano Pron, had in their possession, on the day of the
elections, official ballots that had been prepared and filled out
beforehand with the respondent's name in the space reserved for that
of the candidate for the office of provincial governor, which ballots were
by deceitful means handed to a large number of illiterate electors,
partisans of the petitioner and of the respondent's other rivals, in order
that such ballots might be deposited in the ballot box, as they were in
fact and were counted for the respondent in the canvass of the votes.
"'(d) That said election inspector, acting fraudulently and
deceitfully, marked the ballots of the electors who, being illiterate or
physically incapacitated from writing them themselves, solicited their
assistance and did mark such ballots without consulting the will of said
electors as to what candidates they intended to vote for; whereby
many votes were obtained for the respondent which should have been
for the petitioner.
"'(e) That said election inspectors including the poll clerk were,
during the whole day of the election, carrying on election propaganda
in behalf of the respondent within the polling place, soliciting from the
electors who went to the polls their votes for the respondent, and
threatening many of such electors with imprisonment and other future
vengeance if they voted for the petitioner, and, not content with such
electioneering work, said inspectors entered the booths to see what
the electors who could read and write wrote on their respective ballots,
thus scandalously violating the secrecy of the ballot. The names of the
electors to unduly influenced are Baldomero Rojas, Antonio Asog,
Bonifacio de los Santos, Pablo Estoller, Higino Migico, Narciso de los
Santos, Mariano Relose, Santiago Ferrer, Salvador Malolot, and there
are other names unknown to the petitioner at the present time. The
election inspectors also addressed the following threat to the electors
who were present at the polls: "Let whoever wishes to go to jail have
tickets for Garchitorena."
"'(f) That many ballots were deposited in the ballot box without
the presence of the electors who prepared them, for said inspectors
obliged such electors to go out before said ballots were there
deposited.
"'(g) That said inspectors refused to show the electors, who
solicited their assistance because of illiteracy or some physical
disability, the contents of the ballots prepared by the former at the
request of the latter.
"'(h) That said Governor Fuentebella, between 7 and 12 o'clock in
the morning of the day of the election, stationed himself at or near the
door of the polling place of Calabanga with a revolver at his waist and
during all that time asked of the electors going to the polls, and
searched them for, the provisional ballots of election propaganda —
each of which ordinarily contains the ticket of the candidate for whom
the elector provided with one of such ballots intends to vote — and
every time that said Governor Fuentebella found ballots of this kind
containing the name of the petitioner, he would threaten the electors
carrying them with imprisonment and other persecutions and future
acts of vengeance if they persisted in carrying those provisional ballots
to the polling place and voting for the petitioner. Thereupon said
inspectors would exchange said provisional ballots for others
containing the name of the respondent and would especially charge
these electors to vote for the latter, else great personal misfortunes
would befall them. Under such terrifying threats uttered by the first
authority of the province, many electors who otherwise would have
voted for the petitioner voted for the respondent.
"'(i) That Governor Fuentebella himself, on the day and night
prior to the date of the election, was in secret conference with said
inspectors and poll clerk in said town of Calabanga, and during the day
of the elections was, by means of letters, in continual communication
with said inspectors and poll clerk, and afterwards went up into the
polling place and remained therein for some time engaged in
conversation with the inspectors.
"'(j) That said election inspectors did not permit the petitioner's
watchers and those of the other candidates to witness the voting, and
during the canvass of the ballots said watchers were placed at such a
distance from the table where the counting was done that they could
not see nor read the contents of the ballots while these were being
read by the inspectors; wherefore the petitioner believes and so alleges
that many of those ballots read as votes for the respondent were really
votes for the petitioner.
"'(k) That said election inspectors did not count the good ballots
placed in the ballot box before proceeding with the canvass of the
votes, as the law requires.
"'(l) That many ballots found in the ballot box were not read by
the inspectors during the canvass of the votes, but were placed in the
box of spoiled ballots.
"'(m) That 351 electors voted in this precinct on the day of the
election, and notwithstanding, according to the returns, only 340
ballots were found in the ballot box.
"'(n) That the illiterate voters or those incapable of writing voted
without previously having taken the oath of illiteracy or incapacity.'
"The court believes that he can greatly shorten the discussion
and resolution of the many questions brought up in the allegations
above transcribed, by going directly upon an examination of the main
and most essential one of them, namely, relative to the votes cast in
the sole precinct of Calabanga.
"We shall begin with the votes cast by the illiterates.
"The inspectors themselves, called upon to pick out from among
the good ballots those they wrote, identified the following: the
inspector Toribio Felipe 2 ballots, both for the protestee; Roman
Malanyaon 50, 44 of which are for Manuel Crescini and 6 for Andres
Garchitorena; and Manuel Sabido 49, 35 for Crescini and 14 for
Garchitorena. The handwriting expert discovered 6 more ballots, all for
Crescini, as having been written by the inspector Sabido, and the court
believes that they were in fact; so that the total number of ballots
prepared by Sabido is 55. There are therefore 107 ballots that were
written by the three inspectors, including the three ballots of their own,
so that 104 of them must have been cast by illiterates. As to how many
the latter were, if any, is what cannot be determined.
"It is a fact proven by the absence of due certification and by the
testimony of the election inspectors themselves, that no list was made
of the illiterate and incapacitated voters who requested assistance and
were assisted in the preparation of their ballots. The board of
inspectors and the poll clerk gave not the slightest importance to this
detail, nor did they care to inform themselves as to whether or not
there was need of such a list. It appears that they did not care even so
much as to trouble themselves in procuring and keeping in the polling
place a copy of the Election Law.
"In speaking here of the list of the illiterate electors, we refer to
the registry of the oaths taken by the incapacitated who were assisted
by the inspectors, which list according to law should be kept by the
board and, after the election, filed with the municipal secretary
together with the other election documents.
"An attempt has been made to convince the court that the
absence of the list was due to ignorance on the part of inspectors; that
they committed that fault or incurred such neglect in good faith; and
that as to the rest they complied with the requirement to administer
the oath of incapacity to each elector who solicited their assistance and
did so before assisting them in the preparation of their ballots.
"The court can give no weight to such statements. The acts
performed by public corporations and boards and by public officials
should have as their principal if not as their best and only proof their
own records and their own registers which according to law they must
keep. In the instant case, the lack of the record or register of the
proceedings of the electoral board of Calabanga, with regard to the
illiterate electors, simply shows that actually no such oaths, nor any at
all like them, were either given or taken.
"And this is corroborated by the testimony of several witnesses,
without including the contradictory statements of the inspector Manuel
Sabido and the poll clerk Valeriano Pron.
"In the case of Manalo vs. Sevilla (24 Phil. Rep., 609), the
Supreme Court said:
"'Question 5: Should an illiterate or other voter, who, through
physical disability, is unable to cast his ballot without assistance, be
permitted to vote without first taking oath to his illiteracy or disability?
"'He should not. The provision of the Election Law relative to this
matter is as follows (Sec. 22):
"'"A voter otherwise qualified who declares that he cannot write,
or that from blindness or other physical disability he is unable to
prepare his ballot, may make an oath to the effect that he is so
disabled and the nature of his disability and that he desires one or two
of the inspectors named by him to assist him in the preparation of such
ballots. The board shall keep a record of all such oaths taken which
shall show the name or names of the inspector or inspectors assisting
the voter and file the same with the municipal secretary with the other
records of the board after the election. The inspector or inspectors so
named as aforesaid shall retire with the voter and prepare his ballot
according to his wishes. The information thus obtained shall be
regarded as a privileged communication."
"'Under these provisions the oath of illiteracy or disability is a
condition precedent to the right to vote. To permit voters to receive
assistance in casting their ballots without any evidence as to their
disability would be to open the door somewhat to fraud, coercion, and
intimidation and to remove to some extent the secrecy of the ballot.
This can not be permitted, and to that end the oath must be taken
before the elector may be allowed to cast his ballot.'
"And in 15 Cyc., 367, it is said that —
"'A statute which provides that a voter shall take an oath of
disability before his ballot can be marked for him and deposited is
mandatory, and a ballot so marked without his declaration on oath
being made is illegal and cannot be counted.' (In re Cusick, 136 Pa. St.,
459, 10 L.R.A., 228, etc.)
"Besides, supposing it were true that the illiterate and
incapacitated voters assisted by the inspectors in the preparation of
their ballots really did take oath as to their incapacity, the mere fact of
the lack of the list of such incapable electors so assisted is fatal and is
a sufficient reason for rejecting their votes in the canvass or recount.
"In Villamor on Elections the following paragraphs [1100-1102]
are quoted from the judgment rendered by the Court of First Instance
of Pampanga, in the case of Arnedo vs. Liongson:
"'The evidence shows that an inspector of the election precinct of
the municipality of Candaba, province of Pampanga, wrote ballots in
excess of the number of electors assisted by him, and defrauded the
latter in the expression of their will, by writing other names instead of
those indicated by them. In view of this fraud, the court rejected the 92
ballots written by this inspector, inasmuch as only 82 electors
requested him to assist them in filling out their ballots. Thirteen ballots
from this precinct, written by three persons only, were also rejected.
(Arnedo vs. Liongson, of the Court of First Instance of Pampanga.)
"'It was also discovered that an inspector of the election precinct
of the municipality of Magalang wrote 65 ballots, while only 61 illiterate
voters solicited his assistance in filling out their ballots, and 32 ballots
written by no more than eight persons were found in the ballot boxes.
All these 32 ballots as well as the 65 written by said inspector were for
the respondent. The court considered them as fraudulent and deducted
them from the legal ballots. (Id.)
"'Likewise, in the election precincts of the municipality of Arayat
a larger number of ballots was found to have been cast than that of the
illiterate voters who solicited the assistance of the inspectors; there
were also 31 ballots that had been written by not more than eight
persons. All of the ballots first referred to, aggregating 64, together
with the 31 last mentioned, were rejected by the court and deducted
from the legal votes. (Id.)'
"In the case of Gardiner vs. Romulo (26 Phil. Rep., 521) it has
been seen that the Supreme Court made no comment on the doctrine
laid down and adopted by the lower court, to wit, that when there is a
discrepancy between the list of illiterates and the ballots identified as
written by the inspectors for such illiterates, all the ballots cast by the
latter should be rejected.
"If the mere discrepancy between the numbers given in the list
and the ballots themselves may give rise, as it has, to the rejection of
the votes cast though the difference be not very considerable, then
with all the more reason should the ballots said to have been cast by
illiterates be rejected when the disagreement is as great as 104 to 0
(for the lack of the required list is equivalent to zero).
"Furthermore, principally in so far as the list of illiterates is
concerned, these inspectors of Calabanga cannot plead the excuse of
ignorance of their duties, nor that, though careless, they acted in good
faith. The appointment of election inspectors was the subject of lively
contest between the interested parties, both before the municipal
council of Calabanga and before the justice of the peace of the
provincial capital, acting as judge of the Court of First Instance.
"If the rule, or doctrine, or practice spoken of by the author
Villamor in his work on Elections, par. 1117 [d], is that 'in the exercise
of the authority to determine all questions relative to the regularity and
legality of the acts performed by election officers, the courts recognize
the presumption that all the officers and other persons charged with
the conduct of elections, the counting of votes, and the certification of
election returns acted in conformity with law, so long as the contrary
be not specifically alleged' it necessarily follows that it must also be
presumed that such officers and other persons charged with the
conduct of elections know and are informed of the provisions of law
bearing on the subject; otherwise there would be no reasonable and
legal foundation for the presumption that they acted in conformity with
the law.
"It is then presumed that these inspectors of Calabanga were
informed of the provisions of the law, at least in so far as their duties as
inspectors were concerned, and if they did not know those provisions
they should have informed themselves of them, as they had sufficient
opportunity to do so, especially when they were with Governor
Fuentebella in the house of Guillermo Tordilla, a candidate for
municipal president, on the morning of the elections, or they should
have provided themselves with a copy of the Election Law and taken
the trouble to inform themselves of its provisions.
"They did nothing of this, nor did they pay any attention to the
preparations of the polling place, voting booths, and other things
necessary for the elections. They simply conducted themselves in
accordance with their own whims. These facts are disclosed by their
own testimony.
"On the other hand, the record contains evidence which proves
that all that transpired with respect to the illiterate voters and the
registration of their oaths forms a part of a preconceived plan for
improper election purposes.
"The 104 votes of alleged illiterate and otherwise incapacitated
voters who were assisted are declared fraudulent and should be
rejected from the canvass effected or from the recount to be made.
"The foregoing disposes of the allegations contained ill
paragraphs (c), (d), (g), and (n) of the motion, in so far as concerns the
votes cast by illiterates. An extensive discussion and separate ruling on
each one of said allegations is unnecessary, it being indifferent
whether or not they have been proven, inasmuch as in an affirmative
case the result would be the same, namely, the rejection of the 104
ballots in question.
"It should be said, however, that the court does not consider the
fact proven that, on the day of the elections, the election inspectors
held official ballots previously filled in with the name of the protestee
written in the space provided for the name of the candidate for the
office of provincial governor, and that such ballots were, through
deceitful means, delivered to a large number of illiterate electors —
partisans of the protestant and of other candidates — to be deposited
in the ballot box.
"The corroborative testimony of Eulalio Daliba and other
witnesses in regard to the abovementioned feature is unworthy of
credence, inasmuch as, aside from its unlikeness and inconsistency in
many of its main details, it was duly and completely rebutted by the
evidence adduced by the protestee.
"The inspectors could not have had these official ballots in their
possession, for the purpose of filling them in during the night prior to
the day of the election, inasmuch as the then municipal treasurer,
charged with the custody of said ballots, delivered them to the
inspectors only on the very morning of the elections, according to his
testimony and as shown by the proper receipt, which bears the date of
June 6, 1916. (See Calabanga documents; Ballot box.)
"Under the circumstances described by Eulalio Daliba himself, it
is unlikely that he could have seen and recognized the figure of the
eagle borne on the back of the official ballots. The court is convinced
that Daliba is a professional witness, or that he lacks but little of being
one.

"The evidence derived from the ballots brands as false the
declarations of Eulalio Daliba and of the other witnesses in
corroboration, and shows the groundlessness of the suspicions
entertained by the handwriting expert, who insinuated that the ballots
filled in by the inspector Malanyaon appeared to have been written all
in the same place and on one single occasion.
"It is sufficient to say that Eulalio Daliba stated that the ballots
which he said he had seen in Tordilla's house and are supposed to have
been filled in by Malanyaon, formed a pile or bundle more than one
inch thick, from which he concluded that there were one hundred or
more of them. He also said that Manuel Sabido counted the ballots that
had already been written and announced that their number was nearly
one hundred; but only about 50 ballots written by said inspector
Malanyaon were found in the ballot box.
"If it is said in reply to this that the rest of the ballots, of the one
hundred or so to which Daliba referred, must have been written by the
other inspector, Manuel Sabido, who it is stated accompanied
Malanyaon, then it is very strange and significant that the handwriting
expert should not have noticed in the ballots written by Sabido the
same peculiarities that awakened his suspicions with reference to the
ballots written by Malanyaon.
"The court must also hold that the facts set forth in paragraphs
(d), (g), and (n) of the motion, particularly in paragraph (n) wherein it is
averred that the illiterate voters or those incapable of writing voted
without previously having taken the oath of illiteracy or incapacity,
were more or less fully proven.
"As regards the allegations concerning the electioneering and
abuses committed against the electors who had or carried provisional
ballots containing the protestant's name and the taking away of such
ballots from the voters or compelling them by threats to get rid of the
same, the court finds that, though these alleged facts be true, they
differ a good deal from those relative to the electioneering and threats
referred to in the case of Gardiner vs. Romulo, supra.
"In that case the then governor was one of the candidates for the
same office, and he and partisans of his were electioneering and,
through threats, changing provisional ballots within the 30-meter limit
from the polling place. In the instant case, although the governor now
in office is accused, as Governor Fuentebella was then, he did not do
within the 30-meter limit, but outside of it, what he is charged with
having done; he did not electioneer in behalf of the protestee, nor was
it satisfactorily proven that he was Crescini's exclusive campaign
manager; he simply belonged to the latter's party, as did also the other
candidate for governor, Engracio Imperial, who was with Fuentebella on
that occasion; neither did he change provisional ballots containing the
name of the protestant Andres Garchitorena for those containing that
of the protestee Manuel Crescini.
"Moreover, with respect to the illiterate electors who, it appears,
were merely passive subjects of the acts attributed to Governor
Fuentebella, their votes should be deducted as previously said, for the
reasons explained elsewhere herein.
"It is also said that the inspectors and poll clerk electioneered
and made threats to illiterate voters within the polling place itself; but,
from the oral testimony produced in regard to this point, given by only
a small number of witnesses and contradictory or inconsistent in
several of its principal details, it cannot be legally concluded that these
averments of the motion have been duly proven beyond all doubt.
"In view of all the circumstances of the case, the court is inclined
to believe that the inspectors and poll clerk of this municipality were in
fact remiss in the discharged of their duty to remain absolutely neutral
in the contest waged by the several candidates; but in view of the fact
also that the evidence bearing on this point, aside from being
contradictory and inconsistent in several of its details, as we have just
said, is that of witnesses naturally partial and passionate, the court
hesitates to declare that such facts are absolutely true and that they
had an influence over the result of the elections. "With respect to the
strife over the appointment of inspectors, which is also the subject of
one of the grounds of the motion, the court finds that it was carried on
by and between the two candidates for municipal president, Guillermo
Tordilla and Felino Padilla, and that the protestant and the protestee
were entirely unconcerned therein, or that at least there is no evidence
that either of the latter took or had any part in the same.
"There are documents that speak for themselves, and the court
prefers to quote, with brief comments, the parts thereof pertinent to
the present case.
"On February 29, 1916, the municipal council of Calabanga
adopted its resolution No. 26 (Exhibit E), the tenor of which is as
follows:
"'Resolution No. 26 . — The chairman brought before the council
the matter of the necessity of appointing three election inspectors and
one poll clerk, in accordance with Act No. 2045, in view of the nearness
of the time for holding the general elections for the present year, 1916.
On motion by Councilor Tordilla, seconded by the chairman, the
following resolution was adopted: Be it resolved: To proceed by secret
ballot to the appointment of inspectors. After the voting and the
counting of the ballots (the chairman also voted) it was found that
Victorio Colera, Manuel Sabido, and Cirilo Sinogba had been chosen as
election inspectors, and Roman Malanyaon, poll clerk. Passed
unanimously.'
"Felino Padilla, candidate for municipal president, petitioned the
court for the annulment of this resolution concerning the
appointments, on the ground, among others, that such appointments
were untimely by reason of their having been made long prior to the
date fixed by law. His petition was granted and the court annulled the
resolution and ordered the municipal council to proceed with the
appointment of inspectors on the 15th day of April, or, in case that
could not be done on said date, on Monday, the 17th of the same
month. (Exhibit D.)
"The municipal council of Calabanga, instead of meeting on the
15th of April, met two days earlier on April 13th, and on this latter date
passed its resolution No. 45 (Exhibit E), which is of the following tenor:
"'Resolution No. 45 . — On motion by the municipal vice-
president, the following resolution was adopted: Whereas the
appointment made by this municipal council, of election inspectors and
poll clerk, has been annulled by the justice of the peace court of the
provincial capital through a protest filed before said court; and
"'Whereas, in pursuance with law, it is necessary to make new
appointments.
"'Therefore, be it resolved: To appoint as inspectors for the
approaching elections Manuel Sabido, Cirilo Sinogba, and Roman
Malanyaon, and as poll clerk, Valeriano Pron. Yeas: Esteban Malanyaon,
Monico Galves, Juan Carino, Luis Ygusquiza, Francisco Amador, and
Gerardo Parato. Nays: Esteban Frutos, Esteban Reganit, and Julio
Cardena.'
"It appears that the council doubted the legality of its resolution
just above transcribed, by reason, of its having been passed on the
13th day of April, and at its regular session of the 15th of the same
month passed Resolution No. 48 (Exhibit E), which is as follows:
"'Resolution No. 48 . — Reading was had of the copy, in its
entirety, of the decision of the justice of the peace court of the
provincial capital, dated April 12, 1916, in which decision, among other
pronouncements, it is held that the appointment of election inspectors
and poll clerk in favor of Victorio Colera, Manuel Sabido, Cirilo Sinogba,
and Roman Malanyaon, effected at the session held on February 29,
1916, is illegal, null, and void, by reason of its not having been made
on the date fixed by law, and therefore said court orders the municipal
council to proceed with the appointment of new election inspectors and
a new poll clerk, at its session to be held this 15th day of April, 1916,
or, if impracticable for any reason, on the 17th of the same month.
"'The chairman asked the opinion of each one of the members of
the council as to whether or not new inspectors should be appointed in
accordance with the decision of the court referred to. Councilors
Yguzquisa, Malanyaon, and Amador, and vice-president Parato favored
a new appointment, as did also councilor Reranit. The latter stated that
at the session of April 13, 1916, he had dissented as he could not agree
to the appointment of same of the inspectors effected on that date. He
therefore thought that for his satisfaction he might be allowed to name
the persons whom he desired to be chosen as election inspectors.
Councilors Frutos, Carino, and Galves were of the opinion that the new
appointment should not be made, for the reason that at the session
held on April 13, 1916, these positions had already been filled by
appointment. Councilor Cardena reserved his opinion.
"'As a result of the opinions above mentioned it was resolved by
a majority vote to appoint new election inspectors and a new poll clerk,
in conformity with the decision of the court aforenamed. Upon a vote
being taken Manuel Sabido, Justo Bordado and Roman Malanyaon were
chosen as inspectors, and Valeriano Pron, as poll clerk, it being
understood that from the vote taken by the council on the matter
Messrs. Cirilo Sinogba and Roman Malanyaon received a tie vote; so
the chairman cast the deciding vote in favor of the latter.' By this
resolution Justo Bordado was appointed for the first time to take the
place of Cirilo Sinogba. His appointment was proposed by Felino
Padilla, candidate for municipal president, who claimed that said
Bordado belonged to his party.
"In the afternoon of that same day the council again met in
special session and adopted its resolution No. 50 (Exhibit E), which is
as follows:
"'Resolution No. 50 . — The municipal vice-president in the
regular session of this day submitted the following resolution:
"'(1) Whereas, on April 13, 1916, the municipal council in special
ession, proceeded to the appointment of election inspectors, in
accordance with the decision of the justice of the peace of the
provincial capital;
"'Whereas it is not superfluous or unnecessary to ratify said
appointments; and therefore,
"'Be it resolved to ratify, as is hereby done, the resolution
adopted by the municipal council of Calabanga on April 13th and which
concerns the appointment of election inspectors and poll clerk.
"'Be it resolved, further, to set aside, as is hereby done, the
resolution adopted by this council on the morning of April 15, 1916,
and which concerns the appointment of inspectors. Adopted
unanimously.'
"On April 17th, the council again met, also in special session, to
adopt its resolution No. 65 (Exhibit E) which reads:
"'Resolution No. 65 . — On motion by the Chair, Be it resolved to
ratify, as is hereby done, the appointments made of election inspectors
in the regular session of April 15, 1916, as said appointments are in
conformity with the pronouncements of the judicial decision which
holds to be illegal, null and void the appointments made of election
inspectors in the special session of April 13, 1916, and in the regular
session held in the afternoon of the 15th of the same month, at which
latter session the appointments made at the session on the 13th of said
month of April were ratified, all of such appointments being in conflict
with said judicial decision. Unanimously adopted.'
"On April 19th, Governor Fuentebella suspended from office the
municipal president of Calabanga, Dionisio Bordado, and likewise the
four councilors Julio Cardena, Esteban Reganit, Monico Galves, and
Francisco Amador.
"On the same date the council composed of the remaining
councilors and the new appointees in substitution of the suspended
councilors met in special session presided over by the acting municipal
president, for the purpose of passing resolutions among which was that
numbered 67 (Exhibit E) as follows:
"'Resolution No. 67 . — In the session held to day councilor Luis
Ygusquiza submitted the following resolution: Whereas, on the 13th.
15th. and 17th of April, 1916, the municipal council in special sessions
appointed three election inspectors and a poll clerk, in accordance with
a decision rendered by the court of this provincial capital;
"'Whereas the resolutions adopted at said sessions treated of the
same matter and in such a confused manner that the resolution of the
13th of April was annulled by that of the morning of the 15th, and that
of the afternoon of the 15th, by that of the night of the 17th; and
"'Whereas it is desired to avoid wrong interpretations and that
said appointments of inspectors and poll clerk be duly ratified,
"'Therefore, Be it resolved: (1) To annul the resolution of the
13th, that of the morning of the 15th, and that of the night of the 17th,
concerning the appointments of three inspectors and a poll clerk; (2) to
rectify the resolution of the municipal council of Calabanga, No. 50, of
the afternoon of April 15th, except the part thereof relative to the
appointment of Manuel Sabido; and (3) to appoint, as is hereby done,
Juan Garza, Cirilo Sinogba, and Roman Malanyaon, as election
inspectors, and Valeriano Pron, as poll clerk.' Adopted by a majority
vote.
"'Councilors Guisic and Himantog dissented; the former proposed
Justo Bordado, Cirilo Sinogba, and Juan Garza, as inspectors, and
Valeriano Pron, as poll clerk; and the latter Toribio Felipe, Faustino
Perfecto, and Eustaquio Portugal as inspectors, and Valeriano Pron as
poll clerk.'
"This last resolution, as well as the others from which the name
of Justo Bordado was eliminated from the names of the inspectors
appointed, was the subject of an appeal on the part of Felino Padilla,
which appeal was decided favorably to him by the justice of the peace
court of the provincial capital, acting as judge of the Court of First
Instance, by annulling the resolutions Nos. 45, 50, and 67, and
declaring the resolutions Nos. 48 and 65 to be valid. Consequently, the
appointments of Manuel Sabido, Justo Bordado, and Roman Malanyaon,
as election inspectors were sustained.
"Justo Bordado resigned his office alleging sickness and was
substituted by Toribio Felipe who, with the two appointees above
named, acted as inspector on the day of the election.
"Such is the history of the conflict waged over the appointment of
election inspectors in the municipality of Calabanga.
"If Governor Fuentebella took part in it, there would be no reason
for surprise, as he was governor.
"As may be seen, it was all a purely local question and one of
procedure. The herein protestant and protestee were not parties to
that wrangle, and, as in the case of Baao, the court believes that,
although the matter in dispute is in a certain manner connected with
the conduct of the elections, yet the relation is not one of causality,
that is to say, such changes of inspectors had no bearing on the votes
obtained by the protestee Manuel Crescini nor on those which the
protestant Andres Garchitorena failed to obtain.
"With respect to the other irregularities, both those relative to
the polling place and the voting booths, as well as those concerning the
manner in which the inspectors conducted themselves towards the
watchers, also a subject of complaint on the part of the protestant, the
court is convinced that these irregularities actually existed.
"The polling place was in the second story of the municipal
building, which was fitted and equipped to serve for this purpose, while
the ground floor might have been used instead. The voting booths had
no doors; it appears that they had been provided with them but that
they were removed, to which removal the inspectors paid no attention
whatever. There was no railing in front to serve as a guard rail.
"It appears however that although all this may be another reason
for holding that the inspectors of Calabanga committed, as such,
breaches of duty, or were negligent in the due compliance with their
duties, such commissions and omissions do not warrant a holding that
the election was seriously vitiated, inasmuch as there is no evidence
that the secrecy of the ballot was thereby violated; there was no
person near in front of the booths while the electors were filling out
their ballots, nor was anybody in the room, except the electors inside of
each booth, and the inspectors were stationed in such a way that their
backs were turned towards the booths. (See Exhibit C, Calabanga.)
"In the case of Gardiner vs. Romulo (supra), the Supreme Court
made pronouncements in regard to this kind of irregularities, and said:
"'Were we confronted with the bare proposition that the polling stations
were located on the second floor and that the 30-meter space around
them was not kept clear, it might be that we should not have taken the
drastic step of avoiding the returns from this municipality. The law
directs that these things be done, but it does not say that the fact that
they were not done shall have the effect of vitiating the returns, and
unless the non-observance of the law in this respect was made a
means of fraud or coercion they should be considered as harmless
irregularities.'
"In that case said irregularities were combined with several facts
showing as many election frauds and that the 30-meter space was not
kept clear. In the present case. not only was said space clear (this was
one of the grounds of the protestant's complaint), but also there were
no people in the room and polling place, except the electors inside the
respective booths occupied by them, the election inspectors and
polling clerk, and a policeman or two at the door of the polling place to
keep order.
"In view of these facts and of all the circumstances of the case,
the court chooses to apply most benignly the principle expressed in the
citation above given of the pronouncement made by the Supreme
Court, and consequently considers said irregularities as of no vital
import. On account of these irregularities all the ballots cast in the
single election precinct of Calabanga should not be rejected; but the
votes which for other reasons were declared fraudulent or illegal
should be deducted.
"Now coming to the matter of the recount of the ballots, the court
finds as follows:
"There is a slight variance between the list of voters, the returns,
the ballots, and the statements of the inspectors, to wit:
"The list shows the registration of 368 electors, 348 of whom
voted according to the voting enumerations and 20 of them did not
vote. (Said list discloses however that the elector Natera, J.V., was
listed under two numbers 35 and 147, and Tarala, Nicolas, likewise
two, 22 and 52, which seems to indicate that these men voted twice.)
The returns attest that 340 electors voted, and that the number of
ballots found in the ballot box is also 340. The commission found that
349 ballots were used, 15 of which were thrown out by the inspectors
during the count, and that 19 ballots were spoiled during the voting,
there remaining 80 official ballots in blank, all of which ballots
aggregate the sum of 448 as against 449, the number stated in the
receipt given by the inspector Toribio Felipe to the municipal treasurer
for the ballots delivered to the former by the latter. The inspectors
attest in the statement made by them that 350 electors voted.
"This conflicting fact and the disappearance of one ballot, in
combination with the frauds and irregularities above mentioned, might
seem to be a sufficient reason for the complete annulment of the
election held at Calabanga; but the court does not deem that such a
drastic measure should be adopted until every means shall have been
exhausted of finding some satisfactory explanation and some way to
determine how many and which are the illegal votes, in order to give
proper weight to those that are legal and unsullied.
"It must be taken into account that, in addition to the provincial
protest, there was also a municipal protest regarding the Calabanga
elections, and it appears that, on recounting the ballots then, which
was effected a long time ago, 350 ballots were found to have been
used (according to the inspectors' statements), from which it is
concluded that the disappearance of one of the ballots used occurred
perhaps accidentally subsequent to said recount. It is understood how
350 used ballots were found, though but 348 electors voted, because
each of the electors J.V. Natera and Nicolas Tarala voted twice (on the
supposition that the list is correct in this regard). The incorrectness or
inaccuracy of the returns is another fault for which the inspectors who
drew it up are responsible; but the court believes that such defect can
and should be corrected.
"The result given by the ballots is: for Manuel Crescini 133 (by
the returns, 134); for Andres Garchitorena 82 (by the returns, 81). The
remaining votes were cast for the other candidates, and there were
some scattering votes. In several ballots the space intended for the
name of the candidate for the office of governor was left in blank. Other
ballots were rejected by the inspectors for various reasons. "Several of
these votes were challenged by the protestant on the ground which he
alleged before the commission, and the court decides these objections
in the following manner:
"One hundred and seven ballots were written by the inspectors,
87 of them being for Crescini and 20 for Garchitorena. One hundred
and four of this total number, that is, not including the three votes of
the respective inspectors, which are for Crescini, are rejected, for the
reasons stated elsewhere and because they were written fraudulently
for persons who are unknown and did not take the oath of incapacity.
"Nine votes, 3 of them for Crescini and 6 for Garchitorena (ballots
Nos. 7, 8, 50, 64, 66, 175, 209, 229 and 331), are challenged as being
written by the same hand, probably by the poll clerk V. Pron, not
authorized by law to do so. The court has examined these ballots and
is not convinced that they were written by the same hand. They are
admitted.
"Objection is made to:
"One vote, ballot No. 296, as being ambiguous, because the
name of Crescini is written twice. Rejected.
"One vote, ballot No. 297, for Crescini, as being illegible. It is so,
and is rejected.

"Five votes, ballots Nos. 230, 238, 244, 304, and 310, as bearing
the name of M. Crescini outside the space provided for the name of the
candidate for governor. Of these ballots Nos. 230, 238, and 244 are
admitted, as the intention of the respective elector appears to be
clearly expressed; the remaining two, Nos. 301, (not 310) and 304, are
rejected, as the elector left no space in blank to serve as a guide in
interpreting his intention.
"In recapitulation: Of the 133 votes for Manuel Crescini, 88
should be thrown out, to wit: 84 cast by illiterates, 1 illegible, 1
ambiguous, and 2 with improper spacing, there being a remainder of
45 valid votes; and of the 82 votes for Andres Garchitorena, 20 cast by
illiterates should be deducted, giving a residue of 62 valid votes.
"Municipality of Capalonga.
"The protestant's complaint with respect to this municipality
consists according to his motion in that in this precinct the petitioner
obtained 11 votes for provincial governor and notwithstanding, the
provincial board of this province, in making the general canvass,
awarded him only one vote according to the tabulation said board
made of the returns by precincts of the election held in this province.'
(Record, p. 103.)
"At the hearing the protestee admitted that the provincial board
of canvassers did make a mistake by recording 1 instead of 11.
"Therefore, of the votes cast in this municipality, 6 should be
awarded to Manuel Crescini and 11 to Andres Garchitorena.
"Municipality of Iriga.
"This municipality is the largest of all those of the province of
Ambos Camarines. According to the census of the Philippine Islands of
1903, it had 19,297 inhabitants distributed in very few barrios which
on this account are quite densely populated; they are: Poblacion 2,049;
Salvacion 1,944; San Agustin 1,880; San Antonio 2,203; San Isidro
1,910; San Juan 1,833; San Miguel 1,024; San Nicolas 1,824; Santiago
1,210; Santo Domingo 1,393; and Santo Niño, 2,027.
"In the motion or written protest, the following grounds were
alleged, to wit:
"'(a) In view of the number of registered voters (more than
1,050), three polling places were prepared in this municipality, but the
respondent who is the municipal president of said municipality, instead
of locating said stations in central points in each election precinct,
located all of them at a short distance from his dwelling house in the
barrio of San Nicolas of said municipality and at the entrance to the
town.
"'(b) Two of said polling places were situated in one school
building, and to gain access to them the voters had to climb stairs of a
little more than one meter high. These polling places were not
furnished with any guard rail, as the law provides, and the voting
booth, arranged in line, were made on all sides of a framework of
bamboo covered with paper, but the paper did not cover the entire
framework, there being an open space 2 or 3 inches in width in the
walls or sides of the booths, so that the elector who entered one of the
latter could see and communicate with those who were in the adjoining
booths. Besides, the front part of each one of these booths which
served as an entrance was completely open, had no door and was not
covered with either paper or cloth; so the election inspectors could,
from the place where they were, see, read and observe what the
elector wrote on his ballot.
"'(c) The other polling place was situated in a small camarin built
of bamboo and nipa and without a floor. It also had no guard rail. The
partition walls of the booths of the two aforementioned polling places
[?] and, besides, there was the following particularity: two of these
booths were situated besides the entrance and exit of the camarin, and
the voters assembled near said doors could not only communicate with
the elector in either of said two booths while he was preparing his
ballot, but could even read the contents of his ballot.
"'(d) The election inspectors and the poll clerk of these three
precincts as well as the municipal policemen and other persons, all
partisan of the respondent, engaged very actively in electioneering
within the polling places on the day of the elections, solicited votes for
the respondent, and entered the voting booths in company with
electors who could read and write, in order to see and witness what the
latter wrote on their respective ballots, and by promises or threats to
induce them to vote for the respondents by which means they
obtained many votes for the latter which otherwise would have been
cast for the petitioner or for other candidates. "'The said electors so
unduly influenced are: Juan Borromeo, Feliciano Panis, Sinforoso
Villadares, Doroteo Saunar, Victor Salvadora, Calixto Vizcaya, Juan E.
Taduran, Valenciano Canuto, Julian Naldo, Isaac Lagasina, Rufino
Alanis, and others at present unknown to the petitioner.
"'(e) Said election inspectors in those three polling places had
during the voting official ballots that had been filled out beforehand
with the name of the respondent written in the space intended for the
name of the candidate for provincial governor, and said ballots were
deceitfully delivered to illiterate electors for the purpose of being cast
in the ballot box, as they were in fact cast and counted as votes for the
respondent.
"'(f) The election inspectors themselves had ballots that were
imitations of, or very similar to, the official ballots, and such counterfeit
ballots were delivered to many illiterate electors who went to the polls
to vote and who being deceived filled out said false ballots, believing
them to be authentic, and these were afterwards changed by said
inspectors one of which changes was to make it appear that the
respondent was voted for the office of provincial governor.
"'(g) Said election inspectors defrauded a large number of
illiterate electors who solicited their assistance in the preparation of
their respective ballots, for, instead of writing the name of the
respondent [petitioner?] or those of other candidates for the office of
provincial governor, they wrote the name of the respondent for said
office without the knowledge and against the will of said electors.
"'(h) Many electors, knowing how to write and not being
physically incapacitated from preparing themselves their ballots,
solicited nevertheless the assistance of the election inspectors in the
preparation of their respective ballots, and the latter rendered such
assistance for the purpose of knowing, and in this manner assuring
themselves, that said electors' votes would be for the respondent.
"'(i) A large number of electors who solicited the assistance of
the inspectors in the preparation of their ballots did not previously take
the oath of illiteracy or physical disability as required by law nor did
said inspectors require such oath.
"'(j) A large number of ballots were cast in the ballot box without
the presence of the electors who prepared them, for the inspectors
compelled these electors to go out before said ballots were therein
deposited.
"'(k) More than 300 persons registered in the election list who
were wholly unqualified to be electors voted in said polling places and
their ballots were admitted by said inspectors who deposited them in
the ballot box and afterwards counted them during the canvass made
of the votes.
"'(l) More than 200 electors voted in said polling places after 6 p.
m. on the day of the election and their votes were deposited in the
ballot box and afterwards counted during the canvass made of the
votes.
"'(m) After the closing of the polls, said polling places were closed
for about three hours, during which time the only persons within were
the election officers, and after this long closure the canvass of votes
was commenced, which was conducted so slowly that it lasted three
days, notwithstanding that not more than 400 electors had been
registered in each polling place.
"'(n) Said election inspectors did not permit any candidate's
watcher who witnessed the voting to see during the canvass of the
votes the contents of the ballots as they were counted; wherefore the
petitioner believes, and so alleges, that said inspectors read in many
ballots the name of the respondent, though that of the petitioner or
those of other persons were written thereon as candidate or candidates
for the office of provincial governor.'
"If the proofs adduced with respect to the other municipalities
are numerous, not less so are those that should have been, and in fact
were, presented in support of the objections made against the election
held in the three election precincts of this municipality of Iriga.
"In consideration of the importance of the municipality just
mentioned, the nature of the charges made, and the circumstance that
it was the protestee's place of residence at the time this contested
election was held, he being the municipal president of Iriga, the court
will undertake to discuss each one and all of the questions raised by
the parties in their pleadings and evidence, such as may be pertinent
and necessary for the proper decision of this case, though this will be
done synthetically and with the greatest possible conciseness
compatible with the requisite clearness.
"The allegations contained in the paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of
the motion (as regards Iriga) may be deemed to be proven; the court
declares that they are.
"With respect to said allegations of the protest, not only did the
protestant introduce unblemished and convincing evidence, but also
the protestee impliedly admitted them at the hearing on his trying to
show by his own evidence and by his cross-examination of the
protestant's witnesses, that all that was done in view of the fact that
the municipality of Iriga had no other buildings available for the
purpose.
"In regard to the conditions of the voting booths on the day of the
elections, counsel for the protestee had several witnesses brought
before the court to testify that said booths were in the condition the
law required them to be and had the appearance shown in the
photographs (Exhibits 1 and 2), and that at the time the election was
held the booths in the three polling places or election precincts were
alike or the same in form.
"The court gives no credence to that testimony and those
photographs and although he should like to do so he cannot morally or
legally, in view of the fact that such photographs which are supposed
to have been taken of one or two booths of those used during the
elections held on June 6, 1916, were made long subsequent to the
elections and after they had been covered for the purpose of being so
photographed, and chiefly in view of the following stipulation of facts,
contained in the record and made at the proposal of the protestee's
own counsel:
"While Luis Martinez, one of the protestant's witnesses, was
testifying at the morning session of September 20, 1916, Mr. Lockwood
said:
"'To gain time, we can agree that the booth of the first polling
place of Iriga had no door." (Evidence presented before the Honorable
Judge Paredes, p. 213.)
"It should be borne in mind in the first place that it is the
understanding of the parties in this case and of the court that when
speaking of a door it is not precisely the opening or space through
which the elector passes in entering or going out of the voting booth
that is meant but the actual door itself, namely, a thing made of
material of one sort or another which serves to close said opening or
space and which may be removed or put in place, according as to
whether the door be opened or closed; and the second place, that is an
actual, true, and certain fact that all the voting booths used in three
polling places on June 6, 1916, were similar one to another and had the
same form, like so many copies made from the same model or type.
"The following facts which were proven are intimately related to
the matter of the polling places:
"(a) In the elections prior to that held on June 6, 1916, there were
in Iriga two polling places; (b) said stations were separated from each
other by more than one kilometer, having been so located without
doubt for the convenience of the voters of each election precinct, in
accordance with law; and, (c) at the last general elections, a third
polling place was established and this one and the others were located
in buildings very near each other situated in San Nicolas, the barrio in
which the protestee Manuel Crescini resided.
"It was also proven that the number of booths prepared was
insufficient inasmuch as, for instance, in the first-precinct or polling
station where 423 electors were registered on [?] booths were
furnished, and the tables or desks used were most inadequate.
"Said desks or writing desks were of the kind used by the
children in the public schools. They consist of a seat and a back. Nailed
horizontally to the upper part of the back there is a slightly inclined
board of about 50 centimeters in width which serves as a table for the
pupil sitting in another seat placed behind the first, that is this small
table corresponds to another child who is not the one occupying the
seat of which the table forms a part.
"It is true that these desks or writing desks were placed against
the wall in the rear of their respective booths, the small table being
toward the inside and the seat toward the outside; but the elector,
while writing, besides finding both the table and the seat necessarily
disproportionate for him, had also to assume a very uncomfortable
position, with his feet towards the door of the booth, his body to one
side, and his face towards the rear, that is, he had to twist himself,
unless he wrote with his writing material at his back or at his side, and
in such a cramped position could not shield his ballot from the view of
an observer outside the booth and in front of him, that is, not in line
with the elector's body.
"Another fact is that the six ballot boxes furnished the three
polling places consisted of so many boxes or receptacles of cubic shape
made of pine; the boards that formed their sides simply nailed
together, and their lids or covers were attached by hinges but were
provided with no lock and key. "In view of these facts, can it be said
that the law was complied with? Evidently, no. Sections 511 and 512 of
the Administrative Code [1916] provide:
"'SEC. 511. Designation and arrangement of polling places. — At
least sixty days before each general election the municipal council in
each municipality in which such election is to be held shall designate in
each election precinct a place, as centrally located with respect to the
residences of the voters as is practicable, where the elections and the
meetings of the board of inspectors for registration shall be held during
the year. Each place so designated shall, if practicable, be a room upon
the lower floor, of reasonable size sufficient to admit and comfortably
accommodate twenty electors at one time outside the guard rails. No
liquors shall be sold or cockfights held in any building so designated
from the time of designation until the day after the election. If for any
cause a place so designated shall thereafter and before election be
destroyed or for any cause cannot be used, the municipal council shall
forthwith meet and designate some other suitable place for holding
such registry and election. Not more than one polling place shall be in
the same room, and not more than two polling places shall be in the
same building. The municipal council shall provide for each polling
place at each election the necessary ballot and other boxes, guard rail,
booths, stationery and supplies necessary for the lawful conduct of
each registration and election thereat; shall preserve the same when
not in use and shall deliver all such ballot or other boxes for each
polling place at the opening of the polls of each election. Whenever the
municipal council shall be unable to procure suitable places, or
whenever it shall be more economical so to do, such council may
provide temporary or portable structures adequate to the purpose, and
shall take such measures as are proper and necessary for the storing
thereof and reerection of the same at the following election. Such
structures may be erected in any public street or plaza, but not so as to
block traffic thereon. No building owned or inhabited by any person
who is a candidate for any office for which votes are to be cast in any
precinct shall be used as a polling place for that precinct.
"'SEC. 512. Voting booths. — There shall be in each polling place
during each election a sufficient number of voting booths not less than
one for every fifty voters in the election precinct. Each such booth shall
be at least one meter square, shall have four sides inclosed, each at
least two meters high, and the one in front shall open and shut as a
door swinging outward and shall extend to within fifty centimeters of
the floor. Each such booth shall contain a shelf which shall be thirty
centimeters wide extending across one side of the booth at a
convenient height for writing, and shall be kept furnished with indelible
pencils to enable the voters conveniently to prepare their ballots for
voting. Each booth shall be kept clearly lighted, by artificial lights if
necessary, while the polls are open and until the voting has ended.
"'A guard rail shall be placed at each polling place at least two
meters from the ballot boxes and from the booths, and no ballot box or
booth shall be placed within two meters of such rail, and each guard
rail shall be provided with an entrance and exit, the one separate from
the other. The arrangement of the polling place shall be such that the
booths can only be reached by passing within the guard rail, and that
the booths, ballot boxes, election officers, and every part of the polling
place, except the inside of the booths, shall be in plain view of the
election officer and of persons just outside the guard rail. Each booth
shall be so arranged that there shall be no access thereto except by
the door in the front of said booth.'
"These legal provisions just above cited, which are the same as
those contained in sections 9 and 21 of Act No. 1582, have been
interpreted by our Supreme Court, in Gardiner vs. Romulo ( supra) as
follows:
"'5. The central idea of the election law is to secure a secret
ballot to the electors, to the end that they may express their choice of
candidates uninfluenced by threats, intimidation, or corrupt motives.
"'6. The requirements of the Election Law providing for the
location of polling stations and the construction of booths and guard
rails for the latter may be departed from in some particulars and yet
preserve in substantial form the secrecy which the law requires. But
the failure to provide doors and guard rails for the booths and the
placing of the writing shelf so that it faces the side instead of the rear
of the booth are, combined, a fatal disregard of the law, inasmuch as
such an arrangement does not offer, even in substantial form, the
secrecy and seclusion which, according to the purpose and spirit of the
Election Law, is its most mandatory requirement.' (Syllabus.)
"And in Manalo vs. Sevilla ( supra) the following appears:
"'There should be a booth for every 50 voters and one for a
fractional part thereof.' For example, if there are 51 voters, there
should be two booths.
"Sections 543 and 544 of the Administrative Code [1916] give an
idea of some of the requirements of the law in regard to ballot boxes.
They prescribe:
"'If it should become necessary to make room for more ballots
the chairman may open the box in the presence of all the board and
press down the ballots with his hands without removing any therefrom;
he shall then close, lock and seal the box, as hereinafter provided. In
case of the destruction of the boxes or the failure to deliver them at the
polling place, the board of inspectors shall immediately provide other
boxes or receptacles as nearly as possible adequate for the purposes
for which intended.
"'SEC. 544. . . . At the opening of the polls the ballot box and box
for spoiled ballots shall be opened by the chairman, emptied and
exhibited to all the members and other voters present, and, being
empty, shall be closed, locked, and a seal placed over the lock, and the
boxes shall be kept closed and sealed until the polls are closed, when
the ballot box shall be opened to count the votes.'
"In passing to a consideration of the other questions raised, the
court deems it convenient to discuss then separately, with respect to
each one of the three precincts of Iriga, inasmuch as the evidence
adduced bearing on the irregularities alleged to have been committed
in one polling place, or on the frauds charged against the inspectors of
a certain precinct, ought not affect the voting done in the other two
precincts, though they belong to the same municipality.
"Following the same plan adopted with respect to the other
municipalities or election precincts, the court will proceed first and
preferentially to an examination of the ballots and other documentary
evidence that concern the contested elections.
"FIRST PRECINCT.
"With respect to this precinct, a question arises that is entitled to
preferential consideration, in view of the fact that it is alleged and
there is evidence that the ballot boxes were tampered with.
"In fact, the testimony of the chairman and the poll clerk of the
election board of the first precinct appears to be conclusive with
respect to this question, particularly taking into account the
appearances of the ballot boxes as compared with the other four
pertaining to the other two polling places.
"The commission appointed for the recount deemed it expedient
to ascertain the true condition of the ballot boxes before it should
proceed to open them, and therefore called before it the respective
election inspectors and the municipal secretary in order to give
testimony in regard to the identification and other circumstances
relative to said ballot boxes. In the minutes of the commission referred
to, there is recorded the following memorandum:
"'ENRIQUE ITURRIOS, presiding officer of the first polling place.
He examined the box of the good ballots of the first polling place and
testified that said ballot box had been changed; that the sides of the
ballot box that had been used on the day of the election were of one
single piece, while the sides of the present ballot box are of two pieces;
that the wood of the ballot box used was newer than that of the
present box; that the box of good ballots brought to this commission is
not the same one that was delivered to the municipal secretary after
the election; that the papers containing the signature of the municipal
secretary, which were stuck to the edges of the ballot box after the
election, were no longer there; and that after the election the ballot
boxes were not closed with a key but with nails. He identified the
signature that appears on the strip of paper attached to the lid and
extending across the front side of the box and testified that said paper
is the same one which they (the inspectors) signed and stuck on the
original box in the same manner.'
"The minutes also contain a record of the description of the ballot
boxes, as follows:
"'With respect to the conditions of the ballot boxes before they
were opened by this commission, it is made a matter of record that the
box of good ballots is square on all its sides, is made of packing-case
boards that are quite thick and of a natural color, is similar to the other
ballot boxes of the same municipality of Iriga, and is securely nailed.
On the cover there is a paper of the size of legal cap which extends to
the middle of the front side of the box, and on the edges of this paper
there are several daubs of sealing wax which serve as seals. Said
paper bears the following words: "1.er colegio electoral (1st Polling
Place) and the signatures of Enrique Iturrios and Francisco Hernandez,
and below, "Junio 6, 1916." On the ballot box of good ballots there are
also several small strips of paper stuck to the sides, corners, and
edges, and bearing the following inscription: "Julio 13, 1916,— Pastor
Guadalupe Municipal Secretary." At the bottom of the ballot box of
good ballots of the 1st precinct there is an opening near one corner,
two and a half inches long by one inch wide. This opening does not
appear to have been made by outside force nor by any instrument
whatever, but is a natural break in the wood caused by a knot.
"'The ballot box of spoiled ballots is of the same shape and size
as that of the good ballots, except that it is a trifle higher than the
latter, due to the cover being of thicker lumber.
"'On the cover of this box there is likewise a long sheet of legal
cap paper reaching to the middle of the front side, and on the edges of
this paper there are also daubs of sealing wax and the following words:
"1.er colegio electoral. — Balotas inutilizadas, Junio 6, 1916" (1st
Polling Place. — Spoiled Ballots, June 6, 1916). Said ballot box also has
several papers stuck to the edges, bearing the words: "Julio 13, 1916 —
Pastor S. Guadalupe Mun. Sec."'
"On petition by the parties, the court investigated this incident
relative to the alleged violation of the ballot boxes, and several
witnesses were called to testify, among them being the election
inspectors themselves and the poll clerk.
"Enrique Iturrios, presiding officer of the election board of the
first precinct, testified that the ballot box used at the election and
intended for good ballots was sealed with paper signed by the three
inspectors (the witness, Francisco Hernandez, and Paulino Federis) and
was delivered to the municipal secretary together with the box of
spoiled ballots (the paper seal of which box appears not to have been
signed by any inspector); that one Sunday night subsequent to the
election, after prior notice by the protestee Manuel Crescini, witness
went with the latter to the municipal building from which they took the
ballot boxes of the first precinct and carried them in a sack to the
protestee's house, and as soon as they entered it Crescini sent for the
other inspector Hernandez who arrived immediately and there upon
broke the cover of the ballot box of good ballots and opened without
breaking the cover of the box of spoiled ballots; that after both
receptacles had thus been opened, he (Iturrios) and Hernandez
engaged themselves in restoring several spoiled ballots which bore the
name of Manuel Crescini for governor, transferring them to the ballot
box of good ballots, and from the latter removed ballots that had been
cast for Andres Garchitorena and for other candidates and put them
into the box of spoiled ballots; that they also erased the name of
Andres Garchitorena from other ballots, writing afterwards in place
thereof the name of Manuel Crescini; and that the ballot box for good
ballots used at the election was destroyed by fire and was substituted
by a similar box which Crescini had there in his house, in which latter
box the good ballots and those corrected were placed, and after this
had been done the lid was nailed down and was sealed with another
sheet of paper like the one used on the destroyed box, but signed by
only the two inspectors Iturrios and Hernandez, the sole persons who
were present during these proceedings.
"Francisco Velasco, poll clerk of the same polling place, testified
that the ballot box exhibited to him as the one used at the election
held in the first precinct of Iriga was not the one there used, because
the ballot box that they used did not have a large opening at the
bottom; that the sides of the genuine box were each made of one
single piece of lumber and not of several; and that the paper
containing the seals was signed by the three inspectors and not by
only two of them.
"The inspector Francisco Hernandez states that the ballot box in
question was the same one that was used at the election for good
ballots, and that he was able to identify it because, when the president
election officer showed the ballot box to the public, he noticed that it
had a small hole at the bottom of the size of a peseta. (When this
inspector testified — which he did before the poll clerk Velasco gave
his testimony — the hole at the bottom of the box was still covered,
and when it was uncovered by removing the paper covering the hole
was found to be two and a half inches long by one inch wide. This
witness denies all the statements made by Iturrios about the violation
of the ballot box and his participation therein.
"The other inspector Paulino Federis testified that he did not sign
the paper affixed to the ballot box bearing the seals, because, though
he had finished his work when the sealing was done and the other
inspectors signed, and though he saw these operations, he had a
headache and forgot to sign, and that neither his colleagues nor the
poll clerk called his attention to the fact that he did not sign.
"The ballot box and the box in question agree with the
description given of them in the minutes of the commission above
transcribed. There is besides the additional circumstance that, on
comparing the ballot box for good ballots with the box for spoiled
ballots, the latter is found to be somewhat larger than the former and,
in comparison with the other four ballot boxes of the three precincts, of
coarser make and a little older. Furthermore, on the lid or cover of this
ballot box there is an old oxidized lock that cannot be opened or
closed, which shows that the box was used in previous years. As to the
box for spoiled ballots, the same previous use is suggested by its
having on the cover a piece of tin plate, indicating that previously it
had a lock. These circumstances in some manner distinguish these
ballot boxes from the others.
"But the court does not wish to decide this question of the
violation of the ballot boxes by solely relying upon the appearances
and the testimony of Iturrios and Velasco. Iturrios, according to his own
statements, had reasons for not liking the protestee Manuel Crescini;
he saw that others were advanced to positions which he had a better
right to fill, that his hopes were not realized of being appointed warden
of the provincial jail, while the other inspectors, his companions, and
the inspectors of other municipalities had already been awarded good
provincial or municipal positions.
"The court prefers to turn to the ballots themselves in order to
contemplate in them the resplendent light of the truth, if they are
found to be intact, or in a contrary case to discover through them the
frauds denounced and chiefly the very fact of their violation now under
discussion.
"In one of the ballot boxes there were found 420 good ballots and
3 improperly filled in and bearing on their reverse side the word
'rejected;' and in the other box, 47 spoiled ballots with the word
'spoiled' written on the back, on some of them with an indelible pencil
and on others with a pen. Of the 420 good ballots, 400 are for Manuel
Crescini, 14 for Engracio Imperial, 4 for Andres Garchitorena, 1 is
illegible, and 1 undecipherable. The 47 spoiled ballots can be classified
as follows: 13 for Crescini, 16 for Imperial, 8 for Garchitorena, 3 for
Botor, and 7 for various other candidates.
"Twenty-two of said 420 good ballots originally bore on their
reverse side the word 'spoiled,' which was erased in order to restore
them; besides, something is noticed in these ballots that distinguishes
them from the other good ones, but which, at the same time, makes
them similar to the spoiled ballots, and it is that the good ballots
(except 2 of them which perhaps through confusion were included) all
have, in about the central and middle part of their upper half, a small
hole produced by a pin, needle, or thread; which indicates that they
were strung together. The same kind of hole is also noticed in 24 of the
47 spoiled ballots, while these 22 ballots just above mentioned, as well
as the other 23 (of the 47) spoiled ballots, have no such hole. These
details show indubitably that the 24 perforated ballots now found
among the spoiled ones were once among the good ballots and were
strung with them by means of the same needle or the same thread,
and that the 22 ballots with the word 'spoiled' erased, or, better said,
restored ballots, must have come from the lot of spoiled ballots with
which they must previously have been joined without stringing of any
kind.
"In accordance with the details above mentioned, the result
given by the 420 good ballots is in perfect harmony with the result
shown by the returns, to wit, 400 votes for Crescini, 4 for Garchitorena,
and 15 for Imperial. (Of the remaining ballots, without doubt either the
illegible or the undecipherable one was counted.)
"In view of the circumstances of the case, what explanation may
be given to this fact, in connection with the violation of the ballot boxes
now under discussion, taking into account besides that 16 of the
restored ballots (Nos. 348, 349, 351, 352, 353, 354, 357, 358, 359,
360, 365, 366, 367, 368, 369, and 370) turn out to have been written
by the inspector Iturrios, one (No. 341) by the inspector Hernandez,
and another (No. 356) by the inspector Federis, and 4 (Nos. 344, 345,
346, and 355), by electors who could read and write?
"The ballot boxes were either actually violated or not; there is no
possible middle ground. If it be the first alternative, then there is no
question and there can be no doubt about the truth of the testimony
given by Enrique Iturrios in so far as it refers to such violation, though
perhaps not with the details related and without the direct or indirect
intervention of the protestee Manuel Crescini. In such a case the ballots
deserve no credence; they lose all their probatory value and carry with
them the total discredit of the election returns.
"If there was no violation of the ballot boxes, and the ballots are
intact and in the same condition that they were when the ballot boxes
were closed and delivered together with the rest of the documents to
the municipal secretary, then we find other frauds and illegalities as
serious as such a violation itself.
"In fact, who wrote on the back of the ballots and afterwards
erased the word 'spoiled'? It could only have been some one of the
election inspectors (apparently Iturrios himself), because 18 of the
ballots were written by the inspectors, supposedly for illiterate voters,
and 4 of them were prepared by electors who could read and write, for
it is presumed that they did not write anything on the back of their own
ballots, nor much less wished to spoil them, and there is no proof that
they did. When a ballot was spoiled (during the voting, it is supposed)
it must have been put inside the box for spoiled ballots, and the elector
must then have received another blank ballot, which after being filled
in must have been deposited in the proper ballot box. On this
hypothesis, 423 good ballots would have been found in the ballot box,
which is the number of electors who voted according to the registry list
with the exclusion of course of the 22 spoiled ballots which, as we have
said, must have been placed in the box intended for them. Then we
find that likewise an illegal act was committed by the spoiling of good
ballots to substitute them by other ballots taken from the box of
spoiled ballots and restoring the substitutes by the erasure of the word
'spoiled' written on their reverse side; and this act could have no other
than a fraudulent purpose.
"Another hypothesis is that the inspector who spoiled the ballot
did so through mistake or carelessness and therefore immediately
restored it and afterwards deposited it in the box for good ballots. Can
such a theory be accepted? Assuredly it cannot, particularly if account
is taken of the fact that most of these ballots were prepared by the
inspectors themselves for supposed illiterate voters. At all events, in
every case the alleged mistake or carelessness is illegal, because, with
respect to the ballots written by electors who could read and write, it
supposes the fact of the inspectors having opened these ballots, and
likewise illegal was the restoration of the latter through erasures, for
the elector should have been given another clean ballot.
"In the foregoing hypothesis no account at all has been taken of
the detail regarding the perforations or small holes made in the ballots
for the purpose of stringing them.
"Besides the absurdity of the suppositions mentioned, the
protestee presented no evidence whatever in rebuttal of the
statements of Enrique Iturrios with respect to the restoration of spoiled
ballots, nor any proof at all to show that such ballots were restored
during the voting or the subsequent canvass of the votes.
"Really, the court finds no complete explanation of this matter
other than that given by the presiding officer of the election board,
himself being one of those who violated the ballot boxes and restored
ballots. That these acts were committed by Iturrios in the house
mentioned and with the connivance of certain, persons who were not
inspectors, is a point which the court deems unnecessary to decide in
these proceedings; it is sufficient to say that the violation of the ballot
boxes of the first precinct of Iriga is a proven fact, and that it was
likewise proven by the ballots themselves that some restored ballots in
which protestee appears to have been voted for governor were
substituted or exchange for good ballots cast for other candidates. The
inspectors Enrique Iturrios and Francisco Hernandez participated
directly in the commission of these acts.
"This leads the court to inquire the purpose of the violation of the
ballot boxes, the origin of the 22 restored ballots, and the reason why
they were previously spoiled.
"The protestant advances the following theory with respect to
these questions:
"As he alleges in his written petition, during the voting the
election inspectors had official ballots which had been filled out
beforehand by writing the name of the protestee in the space allotted
for the office of provincial governor, and it was these ballots that were
deceitfully delivered to illiterate electors to be deposited in the ballots
box, as in fact they were there deposited and were counted as votes
for the protestee. The ballots so prepared since the evening before the
elections were not all given out, but some of them were left over,
notwithstanding that the elections were prolonged in order to enable
all registered electors to vote. These extra unused ballots were spoiled
and placed in the proper box. In making the canvass of the votes they
read on several ballots the protestee's name instead of the names of
the rival candidates which were actually written on said ballots, thus
falsifying the returns; and knowing that these were not of course in
agreement with the ballots, they made the necessary adjustment by
violating the ballot boxes and restoring ballots that had been spoiled.
"In support of this theory the protestant presented among other
evidence the exhibits B-1, B-3, and B-5, the testimony of the municipal
treasurer of Iriga and of the inspector Enrique Iturrios, the electoral
returns of the first precinct (Exhibit F), and the ballots themselves
above mentioned. The Exhibits B-1, B-3, and B-5 together with the
testimony of the municipal treasurer show that the election inspectors
requested and received official ballots and indelible pencils on the
afternoon of June 5, 1916. Enrique Iturrios gave the testimony
reproduced and abridged in another part of this decision. The election
returns set forth among other facts that the polls closed at seven
o'clock in the evening. It has already been said that the ballots referred
to prove the fact of the violation of the ballot boxes and show why they
were violated.
"Against such theory and in rebuttal of said evidence, the
protestee made no objection other than a mere denial, nor did he
endeavor by testimony or by argument to prove the inadmissibility of
the theory in question. He simply adduced evidence tending to prove
his great popularity, particularly in Iriga, the town of his residence. He
attempted to show that he had no need to resort to such illegalities in
order to triumph and sustain the returns nor to attack the credibility of
Iturrios and the other witnesses presented by the protestant.
"The court does not deny the protestee's popularity, and is
morally convinced that the people of the town of Iriga like him, and
that a large majority of the electors of this town voted for him. The
court agrees with him in that not only was there no need to resort to
unlawful means but also that in every case such means should be
repudiated, and does not hold that the testimony given by Iturrios and
other witnesses for the protestant is without defect or blemish. But the
main question hinges on the explanation of the condition and
circumstances of the ballots considered in combination, on the one
hand, with the prolongation of the voting until 7 o'clock in the evening
and on the other, with the requisition for and receipt of the official
ballots on the afternoon of the day immediately preceding that of the
elections.
"Be it as it may, the court considers these questions as
secondary and will not delay further in a more extensive discussion of
them. It is enough to say that whatever might have been the purpose
sought by the violation of the ballot boxes, whatever the origin of the
22 restored ballots, and whatever be the reason why they were
previously spoiled, none of the acts committed in respect to these facts
can be justified, nor did they seek the attainment of any lawful
purpose.
"So then, leaving these questions to one side and scrutinizing
more closely the contents of the ballot boxes aforementioned, for the
purposes of a full discussion of the elections held in this precinct, the
court finds:
"That of the 420 ballots found in the ballot box 187 were written
by the inspectors, Enrique Iturrios having identified 65 as prepared by
him, Francisco Hernandez 86 and Paulino Federis 36; that, according to
the list of illiterates, the number of incapacitated electors who were
assisted is only 146; that 520 ballots were delivered by the municipal
treasurer to the inspectors of the first precinct of Iriga; and that the
total number of ballots returned by said inspectors is as follows:
Ballots filled in and valid 420
Ballots filled in and rejected 3
Ballots spoiled 47
Ballots in blank 49
——
Total 519
"Consequently, one ballot is missing.
"Entering now upon a discussion of the 184 votes cast by
illiterate electors (187 less the three votes of the inspectors), in
connection with the list presented (Exhibit 3, Iriga), omitting for the
present all consideration of the matter concerning the oaths of
incapacity (the poll clerk said in his testimony that those who were
assisted in the preparation of their ballots did not take this oath), and
also of the question as to whether said list of illiterates is or is not
admissible as evidence (it not having been transmitted to the court in
due time, together with the rest of the documents pertaining to the
election), the court will say that either said Exhibit 3 relative to Iriga is
absolutely false, or the election held in the first precinct was full of
illegalities and frauds, or that perhaps both these propositions are true.
"If the 184 ballots were written by the inspectors, which is a true
and undeniable fact for it is shown to be such by the ballots
themselves identified by the very electors for whom these inspectors
wrote them, it necessarily follows that said list of illiterates is false,
inasmuch as it shows that only 146 illiterate electors were assisted.
Ordinarily this statement would suffice, but the court believes that it is
not superfluous to scrutinize said list closely in order to establish
grounds upon which to base such a grave pronouncement as that of
declaring this list to be false.
"Said document is drawn up on a blank form, Election Form No.
8, and its heading is as follows:
"'Minutes of the proceedings of the board of election inspectors.
— In the polling place of the municipality of Iriga, June 6, 1916. — On
this date record is hereby made of the names of the incapacitated
electors who received assistance, the names of the inspectors who
assisted them, together with a statement of the oaths taken before the
board by said electors, and the nature of the disability alleged by the
latter consisting, as to some of them, in their not knowing how to write,
and, as to the others, in defective sight or defective hands.'
"Following this heading appear the Christian names and the
surnames of the persons said to have been assisted, but no mention is
made of the names of the inspectors who gave the assistance. It is
supposed, and we are prone to believe, that said names were written
in the same order in which the voting was done, that is to say, that the
names first recorded are those of electors who voted before the
electors whose names are last.
"Now then, it appears that Lorenzo Panday whose name is the
first on the list, bears No. 189 in the order of the voting, as seen on the
register of voters, which means that he voted long after Anselmo
Molina whose name appears in the middle of the list and bears No. 5 in
the order of the voting and after that of Feliciano Ibarreta, voter No.
196, though the latter's name is the last one of the 146 of the list.
"But the irregularities just mentioned are not the most serious
ones. Said list shows that Pedro Dacara and Sergio Balang were
assisted; however, upon an examination of the register of voters it is
found that such persons, if they exist, were not registered. The case of
Manuel Dacara and Victoriano Taduran is also very conspicuous. It is
given to be understood that these two electors whose names appear in
this list of illiterates voted in the first precinct, assisted by the
inspectors; however, they were not registered in this precinct but in
the second. Manuel Dacara did not vote, and it is not known whether
Victorino Taduran voted or not, for, though he bears No. 117 in the
order of the voting, this number nevertheless was crossed out.
"If it is contended that this list of illiterate electors is correct,
then it constitutes the best proof that at the elections held in the first
precinct of Iriga illegalities and frauds were committed such as those of
the voting of persons not registered in the list of voters and of electors
from another precinct.
"The discrepancy between the number of ballots written by the
inspectors and the number of illiterate electors to whom such ballots
should correspond is undoubtedly a serious defect and one of
considerable importance, as is likewise that of the absence of the
proper register of disabled voters required by law, both of which
defects the court holds to have been proven. It was also proven that
the inspectors of the first precinct were unfaithful in the performance of
their duties in regard to the illiterate voters. But of much more serious
a nature, and of far reaching import, is the unexplained disappearance
of one official ballot.
"When this loss occurred and whether it was a ballot already
filled in or one in blank nobody knows. The fact is that the inspectors
did not render an account of one ballot, did not explain its absence. In
view of all the circumstances of the case it is more than likely that this
ballot was removed during the night before the election by some
elector or by an electioneerer of some candidate, with or without the
knowledge and consent of the inspector who had the custody of the
ballots.
"Now, by a slight examination of the register of voters it will be
seen that several persons, after once having been excluded, were
permitted to vote. This register shows in fact the registration of 42
electors, opposite whose names and in the column provided for
remarks the following note appears: 'Excluded through challenge by
the municipal treasurer.' However, 31 of these electors so shown to
have been excluded did vote and only 11 of them did not.
"There are many and various other questions also, as for
instance that of whether or not the secrecy of some ballots was
violated while the respective electors were voting; that of whether or
not an electioneering was done within the booths; and that of whether
or not any electors voting for the protestant were defrauded of their
votes; but the court does not believe it necessary to go into further
detail in this matter. Suffice it to say that, owing to the conditions of
the voting booths, it was easy to violate the secrecy of the ballots; that
several witnesses presented by the protestant testified that the
inspectors had unduly and improperly influenced them in favor of the
protestee, and the testimony of some of them was not rebutted on
cross examination; and that some thirteen electors capable of reading
and writing testified, and their testimony was not successfully rebutted,
that they voted for Andres Garchitorena, while the returns show but
four votes for this candidate.
"In conclusion: in view of the conditions of the voting place,
booths, and ballot boxes of the first election precinct of Iriga, as
described in the commencement of these considerations; taking into
account the violation of the ballot boxes and the changes or
substitutions of ballots, which fatally and absolutely discredit the
electoral returns: noting the frauds that imply infidelity on the part of
the inspectors in the performance of their duties with respect to the
illiterate voters, and the falsity of the returns made by these
inspectors; considering the disappearance of one ballot, and the fact
that several persons voted who had previously been excluded from the
registration list; and, finally, in view of the commission of various other
irregularities by the inspectors during the elections, the court does not
see how it can lawfully render a decision contrary to the general and
constant doctrine followed by the courts of these Islands according to
which, in such cases, the election must be annulled.
"The election returns are rejected and the election held in the
first precinct of Iriga are annulled. (See McCrary, par. 348; Gaston vs.
Hernaez et al., court of Negros Occidental; Genarao vs. Disipio, court of
Pangasinan; Auresus vs. Pedero, court of Ambos Camarines; also
Villamor on Elections, pars. 1053, 1062, and 1063; and Gardiner vs.
Romulo, 26 Phil. Rep., 521.)
"SECOND PRECINCT.
"From an examination of the ballots cast in this second polling
place of the municipality of Iriga, made in connection with the
pleadings and evidence submitted, the court finds:
"That 284 good ballots and 25 spoiled ones were found in the
ballots boxes; that 184 of these ballots were written by the three
inspectors Juan Castro, Bembenuto Bersamina, and Juan Salvadora in
the proportion respectively of 70, 28, and 86; that of the 70 prepared
by Juan Castro, 55 were identified by him and the rest by the
handwriting expert, with whose opinion the court agrees (said expert
included 5 more ballots, Nos. 81, 83, 93, 95, and 106, also 115, but the
court believes they should be excluded); that the 28 ballots written by
Bembenuto Bersamina were all identified by him, except one, No. 80,
which was found by the handwriting expert and is deemed by the court
to have been written by Bersamina; that, likewise. Juan Salvadora
recognized 31 ballots as having been written by him, and the court is
convinced that the other 55 ballots found by the handwriting expert
were also written by this inspector; that all these 184 ballots are for
the protestee Manuel Crescini, there being not a single vote by any
illiterate elector for any other rival candidate; and that 20 of the ballots
filled out by Juan Salvadora were found completely untampered with,
showing that they never had been folded.
"In the election returns Exhibit G-Iriga the statements, among
others, are made that the polls were opened at 7 o'clock in the morning
and remained open continuously until 8 o'clock in the evening; that
according to the registry lists the number of persons who voted was
288; and that the number of ballots found in the ballot box was 285.
"The same returns, however, also state that the canvass of the
ballots showed that for the office of governor:
Votes
Manuel Crescini received 276
Engracio Imperial 6
Fulgencio Contreras 1
Severo Cea 1
Felipe Momponbanua 1
Francisco Botor 1
——
Total 287
"The list of illiterate voters presented by the protestant as Exhibit
5-A Iriga contains the names of 167 persons who it is alleged,
'requested to be assisted by the inspectors, on account of these
electors being incapacitated, and subscribed their oath of incapacity.'
Said list shows that the inspector Juan Castro assisted 65, Bembenuto
Bersamina 35, and Juan Salvadora 66. Another name is given, without
specifying who rendered the assistance.
"Such are the facts shown to have been proven by the
documentary evidence above mentioned, with respect to which there
is not the least dispute. The question or questions which require
solution are those that arise from the many discrepancies discovered in
comparing one proof with another, and even the different parts of the
same document with each other. These questions may be comprised
within the following simple proposition: Whether or not irregularities,
illegalities, and frauds were committed in the elections held in this
election precinct.
"Commencing with the election returns, the first fact noted is
that the voting was prolonged until 8 o'clock in the evening,
notwithstanding that no more than 285 electors voted, and this is
undoubtedly an irregularity. Secondly, it is made to appear that 285
electors voted, but following this statement, just below it, is another
which shows that 287 votes in the aggregate were cast for governor,
exceeding by 2 the number of voters. This may be an innocent
mistake, but it is none the less another irregularity. Thirdly, the returns
state that the number of ballots found in the ballot box was 285, while
the commissioners and the court found there only 284 — a difference,
of one ballot This might be allowed to pass as an involuntary error, but
it is also another irregularity.
"Coming now to the matter of the ballots themselves, our
attention is greatly attracted by the large proportion of those written
by the inspectors, 65 per cent of all the votes cast; but this is nothing
as against the discrepancies found on comparing this number with that
of the illiterate voters as shown by the list of the latter.
"One hundred and eighty-four ballots were written by the
inspectors, which show that 181 illiterate electors were assisted by
them. Of this number 69 should pertain to the inspector Castro, 27 to
Bersamina, and 85 to Salvadora. But the list of illiterates attests that
only 167 of them were assisted: 65 by Castro, 35 by Bersamina, and 66
by Salvadora. From this it follows that the first inspector wrote 4 and
the last one 19 ballots more that do not correspond to any assisted
elector, while the second inspector wrote 8 ballots less than the
number attested to have been written by him, that is, 8 votes by
disabled electors disappeared.

"If we turned our attention only to the number of the ballots
identified by the inspectors themselves as having been written by
them, consequently excluding those discovered by the handwriting
expert and by the court, we would find a still more unexplainable
difference, inasmuch as the sum of the ballots identified by the
inspectors is only 113, while according to the list the number of
supposed illiterate assisted 167.
"In view of this discrepancy, there is no doubt that the list of
illiterate voters presented as Exhibit 5-A-Iriga is inadmissible. It was not
found among the documents which the municipal secretary
transmitted to the court when he was directed so to do.
"Juan Castro stated that said list was made on the very day of the
elections and that the succession of the names therein contained
corresponds more or less to the order in which the owners of these
names voted. Several of the names however, particularly the last ones,
are not in such relationship with the order of the voting, as may be
readily seen from the following table:
Order of
voting,
Order of going to the polling place to
according
vote.
to the
registry list
153. Policarpo Salvadora 174

154. Pantaleon Iraola 186
155. Estanislao Iraola 54
156. Silverio Orbon 233
157. Apolonio Orbon 171
158. Pedro Orbon 154
159. Emiliano Asiao 191
160. Laureano Adaon 105
160. Laureano Adapon 105
161. Victor Solia 169
162. Norbeto Orgon 129
163. Gabino Tagalog 234
164. Numedico Samonte 196
165. Buenaventura Isabelo 119
166. Casiano Tagum 188
167. Juan Navarro 109
"Moreover, the name of Tomas Casiano figures in said list as
being that of one of the electors who were assisted, while according to
the registration list this elector did not vote. The list of illiterate voters
also contains various other names of electors who, according to the
oral evidence, were able to read and write and were not incapacitated
from filling out their ballots.
"It cannot therefore be sustained that said list of illiterate voters
is correct and legal, and the conclusion is that the inspectors of the
second precinct failed to perform the duty imposed upon them by law
with respect to the registration of the oaths taken by disabled voters,
and consequently, for the same reasons stated in regard to the same
matter in connection with other precincts, the 181 ballots written by
said election inspectors cannot be admitted as legal.
"The most serious fact and of fatal consequence noted in
connection with this precinct is that the ballot box contained 20 ballots
filled in by Juan Salvadora which are completely smooth and with no
signs of having been forged; some of them bear traces or impressions
of letters written by hand and with a pencil, showing that the ballots
must have been under others while these were being filled out on top
of them.
"Said unfolded ballots are those numbered 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13,
14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 26, 49, and 203, and those that
show the traces or impressions mentioned are Nos. 7, 11, 12, 13, 15,
17, 18, 21, 23, and 49.
"What explanation can be given to this fact such as may be
compatible with the legality of the elections and the innocence of the
inspectors?
"None at all. Anyone, upon reflection, will find that it evidences or
implies the commission of illegalities and frauds.
"The most innocent explanation that can be imagined is that this
inspector Juan Salvadora, on the twenty occasions when he had to
assist an illiterate elector, did not accompany him to the voting booth,
but instead went to the inspectors' table and there filled out the ballot
without separating it from the pile while he wrote, and was careless in
not folding it and putting it in the proper ballot box.
"But, as is seen, even this, the most innocent explanation, shows
the acts explained to be replete with illegalities, and it is useless to
examine one by one the various suppositions that might be made.
"The most complete and satisfactory explanation which the court
finds is that, during the voting, the election inspectors actually had
ballots that had previously been filled in with the name of the protestee
written in the space intended for the name of the candidate for the
office of governor (this is shown, though indirectly, by the following
indisputable facts: (a) the requisition for and receipt of the ballots and
indelible pencils from the afternoon of the day immediately the
elections; (b) the existence of 20 unfolded ballots; (c) the similarity
bordering on an almost exact likeness of said 20 ballots, as regards the
names of the candidates voted for; (d) the existence of traces or
impressions of letters, on some of said ballots); that all of the ballots so
prepared could not be disposed of, the 20 ballots in question,
consequently, remaining undistributed; that probably several of the
controvertible ballots, or some of those for other candidates, instead of
being rejected or counted, were spoiled and afterwards substituted by
these extra ballots (in the list there are no remarks about spoiled
ballots and the four such which were found in favor of Andres
Garchitorena are in reality perfectly good ballots); and that, in making
such substitutions during the canvass of the votes the inspectors did
not notice that the ballots in question had not been folded, for most
likely all the ballots were open and spread out before them while being
examined. All these facts show nothing but a series of illegalities and
frauds of the most serious nature.
"Neither is the registration list exempt from irregularities and the
fact of permitting registered persons to vote after they had been
excluded is another proof of another illegality. In said list 54 registered
names appear, opposite which the following note was placed by the
inspectors: 'Excluded through challenge by the municipal treasurer.'
One of the challenged electors voted, and 31 did not.
"Furthermore, the oral evidence shows that there were cases of
violation of the secrecy of the ballot, of electioneering by the
inspectors and policemen on guard within the polling place itself, and
that Garchitorena was defrauded of several votes (eleven [11]
witnesses testified that they voted for this candidate, and nevertheless
only one ballot was found to have been cast for him, or five [5],
including the four [4] found among the spoiled ones; for these four are
good ballots and should be counted).
"There were therefore several illegalities and frauds that sully
the purity of the votes cast in this second precinct. In view of all the
preceding statements, can the good votes be distinguished in order to
separate them from bad ones deposited in the ballot box? It would be
very difficult or perhaps impossible to do so, just as it would be to
follow step by step the whole course of the election, and watch one by
one the acts of the inspectors. Let us try however to proceed to make
such a distinction under guidance of the most, liberal rule possible, and
we shall see what result is attained.
"For the reasons elsewhere explained, 181 votes cast by illiterate
electors should not be accepted. The other irregularities or illegalities
in reference to votes of illiterate electors may add to their
unlawfulness, but cannot increase their number; the same may be said
in connection with other frauds committed against these votes. Such
irregularities and frauds may perhaps make the votes affected by them
more repudiable than they are, but their effects are circumscribed to
the group to which such votes pertain; they cannot contaminate the
other votes honorably cast. That the 20 filled in and unfolded ballots
are indexes of a great fraud, cannot be doubted but their fatal
influence does not pass beyond the bounds of the group to which they
belong, nor beyond those of that of the 181 ballots written by the
inspectors.
"The prolongation of the voting until 8 o'clock in the evening can
produce the nullification of the votes cast between 6 and 8 o'clock in
the evening, but nothing more. In the present case it is relatively easy
to ascertain the number of such votes, and it is already known or
should be presumed that they are all for the protestee, inasmuch as
nearly all the votes cast in the precinct are for him. As 285 electors
voted, according to the returns, and the polls were open for 13 hours,
under similar circumstances 43 electors at the most must have voted
between the hours of 6 and 8 in the evening which gives another
determinate number of illegal votes.
"As certain persons excluded from the registration list voted
notwithstanding, the measure of this illegality is also determinable and
is determined by merely scanning said list, which attests that the
number of such excluded electors is 21.
"The votes vitiated through other causes can perhaps be
determined by an examination of the evidence adduced by the
protestant, and, on the supposition that such evidence has been given
its due and full weight, they would be distributed as follows: for
violation of the secrecy of the ballot 3, for undue and improper
influences 5, and as votes fraudulently wrested from Garchitorena 6
(11 less 5).
"There would thus be a total of about 259 excluded votes, that
is, nearly all those cast in the precinct; and if it is taken into account
that there still remain several challenged ballots, some as being
marked, others because they are illegible, a few for the reason that
they bear certain defects, such as blots, the writing of the name
outside of the proper space, etc., it will be seen that the result is
practically the annulment of the election held in the whole precinct.
"In reality some of the illegalities that mark the purity of the
election in this precinct are of such a nature that it is impossible to
identify with any degree of certainty the vitiated votes in order to
distinguish them from the good ones, particularly if account is taken of
the fact that the same irregularities occurred in this precinct as in the
first, as regards the conditions of the polling place, the voting booths,
and the ballot boxes.
"It is unnecessary to repeat here the considerations already set
forth above and by reason of which the returns and the elections held
in the first precinct were rejected and set aside. For the same reasons
the court finds that the elections held in the second election precinct of
Iriga should be as are hereby, set aside.
"THIRD PRECINCT.
"In order that this decision may not be too lengthy, the court will
say at once briefly that in this precinct the same irregularities and
similar frauds and illegalities were committed as in the first and second
precincts.
"Two hundred and fifty-nine ballots were found in the ballot box,
and 116 of these were identified by the inspectors as having been
written by them (without counting some nine others which the
handwriting expert identified), distributed as follows: the inspector
Ciriaco Alfilor, 56; Pablo Aguilar, 30; and Manuel Seguera, 30.
According to the list presented by the protestee himself, 95 illiterate
were assisted.
"A slight examination of the table below inserted will suffice to
show at once the discrepancies between the ballots identified by the
inspectors and the list of illiterate voters. It must be borne in mind that
this list is one of names, beside each one of which are those of two
assistant inspectors, and taking any of said names, the first as that of
the clerk and second as that of the witness, or vice-versa, nothing is
discovered except an unexplainable disagreement. Here is a table:
Assisted by — As per As per As per
ballots list, first list, second
name name
Ciriaco Alfilor 56 35 28
Pablo Aguilar 30 4 36
Manuel Seguera 30 56 26
In blank 5 5
"Said list (Exhibit 4-Iriga) bears the following heading: 'List of the
qualified electors who voted in the 3rd precinct,' and shows in their
proper numeration the following names among others, to wit: Juan
Barroga 35, Marcos de los Reyes 146, Tomas Oliva 198, Agaton Oliva
199, Marcos de los Reyes 209, Tomas Oliva 198, Agaton Oliva 199,
Marcelo Tabayag 209, and Tomas Gonzalez 226. However, the
registration lists disclose that Juan Barroga did not vote, and that
Marcos de los Reyes, Tomas Oliva, Agaton Oliva, and Tomas Gonzalez
were registered in the second precinct, not in the third, and they too
did not vote. Marcelo Tabayag's name is not found on any of the
registration lists of Iriga, that is to say, he was not an elector.
"As may be seen, this list Exhibit 4-Iriga, is not a faithful record of
the manner in which the election was conducted in this precinct, or, if
it is, then it is a positive proof of the illegalities shown by it to have
been committed. In either case, it cannot be admitted as evidence that
the inspectors proceeded legally in conformity with law with respect to
the illiterate electors.
"So then, the votes cast by the latter, and which number is 113
(116 less 3), must meet the same lot as the rest cast under similar
conditions in the first and second precincts; they cannot be admitted
as legal and irrefutable proofs of fraud stand against the inspectors.
"The court can not explain the fact of there having been found
269 good ballots and two groups of spoiled ballots (one group of 13
ballots which bear on their reverse side the word 'spoiled,' and another
one of 15 without this word). He has examined, very scrupulously and
with the greatest care, the registration lists of the third precinct, and
has found that 282 electors were registered, of whom only 254 voted
and 28 did not. According to these lists, only 13 ballots were spoiled
during the voting.
"So then, there are 5 more good ballots than there should be,
and 15 other surplus ballots (also good, though placed among the
spoiled ones) the genuineness of which is much under suspicion, and
as no explanation whatever was made of this matter, and furthermore
as the court finds that these 15 unblemished ballots which are among
the spoiled ones really must have been rejected during the canvass
(which implies their substitution), he believes that there were also in
this precinct some 20 surplus ballots, which were placed in the manner
above related, and the word 'surplus' necessarily awakens the idea
that, as in the other precincts, ballots were used which had been
prepared beforehand by filling in the protestee's name for the office of
governor.
"If the registration list is correct, as it ought and is presumed to
be, for the litigant parties raised no question whatever in respect to its
exactness, no more than 254 good ballots and 13 spoiled ones could
have been found in the ballot boxes.
"Also in this precinct the voting was prolonged until 7 o'clock
notwithstanding that no more than 282 electors were registered and
that only 254 of them voted.
"In the polling place of this precinct, just as in those of the first
and the second, several electors were allowed to vote whose names
appear in the registration list under the following note written by the
inspectors themselves: 'Excluded through challenge by the municipal
treasurer.' Thirty two of the 51 electors so excluded voted.
"Two ballots (Nos. 110 and 231) bear two different handwritings
and show that the inspector Seguera wrote the name of Manuel
Crescini for governor, and the elector the names for the other offices.
"Several ballots for the protestee which ought to have been
rejected on account of marks, blots, or other defects were admitted
and counted, while the few that were found with the name of Andres
Garchitorena for governor (9 ballots) were either rejected or spoiled, it
is not known exactly which, but the court has decided that at least 7 of
the latter contain no defects such as might bring them into dispute.
"It was proven that in this third precinct, as in the first and the
second, the secrecy of the ballot was violated and electioneering was
done in the polling place. Twenty-four electors testified that they voted
for the protestant Andres Garchitorena; their votes however
disappeared, only one of them being accounted for in the returns and
found among the good ballots, and 9 were found among the spoiled
ballots.
"The court is desirous of adopting the most liberal rule possible
to guide him in passing upon the matter in hand, as he already stated
with respect to the second precinct, and accordingly shall endeavor to
determine the vitiated votes in order to separate them from the good
ones; but it has already been seen that, due to so many irregularities
and illegalities, the application of such a rule brings the result that the
number of votes to be deducted is nearly equal to the total of the votes
cast in the precinct, which is practically tantamount to an annulment of
the elections held therein.
"On account of such frauds and illegalities held to have been
proven, as well as of the non-fulfillment of the law as regards the
installation of the polling place and the conditions of the voting booths
and ballot boxes, and also because of the legal doctrines and the
authorities above cited, the court is of the opinion that, in view of all
the circumstances of the case, it is impossible to arrive at a positive
determination of how many votes are affected by such fraudulent
irregularities, and how many are not.
"The court therefore holds that, with respect to the third precinct
of Iriga, the extreme measure must be adopted of rejecting the returns
of its inspectors and setting the elections held therein.
"Municipality of Lagonoy.
"The grounds of the protest with respect to this municipality are:
"'(a) The polling place of this precinct was situated in the upper
story of a house, and, notwithstanding that 225 electors were
registered in this precinct, only four booths were constructed for voting
purposes.
"'(b) On the 27th of May of the present year, the Court of First
Instance of this Province of Ambos Camarines issued an order annulling
the appointment of election inspectors and poll clerk made by the
municipal council of this municipality in favor of Esteban Mendoza,
Balbino Frondoso, and Doroteo Totailes, as inspectors, and Quintin
Bona, as poll clerk, and ordered said council to proceed to appoint new
election officers within 48 hours after it had been notified of said order.
Consequently, on June 5, 1916, the council appointed new election
officers in the persons of Gaudencio Presentacion, Gil Forteza, and
Manuel Ledesma, as inspectors, and Ananias Obias, as poll clerk
"'(c) On the day of the election, June 6, 1916, said election
inspectors and poll clerk recently appointed took the oath required by
law, but when they attempted to assume possession of their respective
offices they were rudely, improperly, and unlawfully opposed by the
former election inspectors and poll clerk whose appointment, as
aforesaid, had been annulled by the Court of First Instance of this
province. Said former election officers not only made such rude,
improper, and unlawful opposition in obedience to instructions
previously given by governor Jose Fuentebella, a most devoted
partisan of the protestee, who proposed the appointment of these
officers, but also refused to deliver to the new officers all the election
documents, papers, and equipment, and to leave the polling place, as
in fact they did not leave it, and in such manner prevented the new
officers from acting and from holding the elections, which latter
officials, notwithstanding, remained in the polling place on the said 6th
day of June from 7 o'clock in the morning to 7 o'clock in the evening,
when they retired without holding the election.
"'(d) After said new election officers left the polling place, said
Esteban Mendoza, Balbino Frondoso, Doroteo Tetañes, and Quintin
Bona, intrusively assuming authority as election inspectors, the first
three, and as poll clerk, the fourth, did, in obedience to orders given by
Governor Fuentebella, hold the election from 10 o'clock at night until
3.35 p. m. of the 6th of June aforementioned, at which latter hour they
rested until 6 o'clock in the morning of the following day, June 7th,
when they recommenced their labor and continued it until noon, in
order to accomplish, as they did from this latter hour, the canvass of
the ballots.
"'(e) About eighty voters registered in said precinct did not vote,
some of them because, in view of the fact that the election was not
held on the 6th of June, between 7 a.m. and 6 p.m., they believed there
would be no election, and others because they believed and believe
that the election held by said intrusive officers was and is illegal, null,
and void, and, besides, they had no confidence in the honesty and
morality of the latter.
"'(f) Said intrusive election officers carried on the voting by
capriciously calling the electors by their names, four at a time, from the
place where these voters had gathered at a distance of 30 meters from
the polling place, for, like the public in general, they were not allowed
to be in or nearer the polling place, which was surrounded and guarded
by policemen and Constabulary soldiers carrying guns with fixed
bayonets, who also patrolled the house of an elector named Ibo
Alvarez not permitting anyone to go out of it, and abused several
electors awaiting their turn to vote.
"'(g) Said intrusive officers, within the polling place and inside the
booths themselves, unduly and improperly influenced, and used
threats and force upon the voters already daunted by the exhibition of
the armed force around the polling place, to the end that such electors
might vote for the respondent Manuel Crescini. The electors who were
so unduly and improperly influenced by threats and the exhibition of
force are Bonifacio Rosero, Juan Florence, Valentin Primavera, Ciriaco
Rivero, Dalmacio Rellora, and Gerardo Romulo, and others whose
names are at the present time unknown to the petitioner.
"'(h) Said intrusive officers prepared the ballots of the illiterate
electors without inquiring of them as to whom they wished to vote for,
and without paying heed to the indications made to them by said
electors in reference to the latter's choice of candidates for the various
offices.
"'(i) Said intrusive officers made fraudulent record that 134
electors voted, while in reality no more than 115 electors voted in that
election.
"'(j) In view of the secrecy that attended the acts of said intrusive
officers, and of the fraud alleged in the preceding paragraph, the
petitioner believes, and so alleges, that these officers read on some
ballots the name of the respondent for the office of provincial governor,
although the name of the petitioner or that of some other candidates
for governor was written thereon.
"'(k) Governor Jose Fuentebella, in connivance with the
respondent, suspended the municipal president of said municipality, at
7 o'clock in the evening of said 6th day of June, and ordered him to
respect the authority of the chairman of the election board, Esteban
Mendoza, and did all this because said municipal president, since the
morning of said day, tried to expel from the polling place said intrusive
officers in order that those recently appointed might act instead.
"'(l) A few moments before the voting commenced, and during its
progress, said false election inspectors distributed to the voters official
ballots that had previously been filled in with the name of the
respondent as the choice for the office of governor, without said voters
having expressed their desire to vote for the respondent, and these
ballots were placed in the ballots box and counted during the canvass
as votes for the respondent. Moreover, said election officers did not,
before receiving the votes of the illiterate electors or of those
physically unable to write, require them to take the oath of illiteracy or
of physical disability.
"'(m) Said false election inspectors did not deliver the ballot
boxes, together with the election documents, to the municipal
secretary immediately after the termination of the canvass of the
votes, but said boxes and documents were retained by these
inspectors until the day when this court required the same to be
transmitted to it.'
"From the documentary and oral evidence produced during the
trial, it is shown that the general elections held in the municipality of
Lagonoy, Ambos Camarines, in the month of June, 1916, had the
following antecedents and took place under the following
circumstances:
"The municipal council of Lagonoy met several times in order to
proceed to the appointment of election inspectors and a poll clerk, and,
prior to May 31, 1916, did appoint Esteban Mendoza, Balbino Frondoso,
and Doroteo Totanes as inspectors, and Quintin Bona as poll clerk.
"On said date of May 31, 1916, this court, deciding the petition
for a writ of mandamus wherein Eulogio Froa is petitioner and the
municipal council of Lagonoy and others are respondents (Civil Case
No. 2020), held that the appointment of said election inspectors and
poll clerk, Esteban Mendoza, Balbino Frondoso, and Doroteo Totanes,
and Quintin Bona, was null and void and of no value, and issued a
peremptory mandamus directed to the municipal council of Lagonoy of
the province of Ambos Camarines, directing that, within forty-eight
hours after service of notice of said order, it meet and proceed to
appoint election inspectors, two of whom should be such persons as
the petitioner Eulogio Froa might propose. (Exhibit F.)
"In said Civil Case No. 2020, said Esteban Mendoza, Balbino
Frondoso, Doroteo Totanes, and Quintin Bona, as appointed election
inspectors the first three, and as appointed poll clerk, the fourth, were
respondents, together with the municipal council of Lagonoy.
"The dispositive part of the judgment referred to was telegraphed
by the clerk of the court to the municipal council of Lagonoy, through
the municipal president of San Jose, inasmuch as it was of an urgent
nature and there was no time to lose.
"Upon notification and due call by the municipal president, the
council met in special session on June 5, 1916, and proceeded to
comply with the order of the court by appointing Gil Forteza,
Gaudencio Presentacion, and Manuel Ledesma as election inspectors,
and Ananias Obias as poll clerk, to substitute Esteban Mendoza,
Balbino Frondoso, Doroteo Totanes, and Quintin Bona.
"What happened afterwards, that is, on the day of the elections,
is set forth in the statement drawn up by the election inspectors and
poll clerk last appointed, protestant's Exhibit J, the contents of which
are as follows:
"'In this single polling place of the municipality of Lagonoy,
province of Ambos Camarines, P. I., to day, the sixth of June, 1916, at
five o'clock in the afternoon, we, the undersigned election inspectors,
hereby solemnly set forth that at 6.30 a.m. of this date we went to the
polling place for the purpose of fulfilling the duties and obligations
imposed upon us by law as election inspectors legally appointed by the
municipal council at its session held at 9 p.m. of the 5th instant, but
that we were unable to enter the polling place for the reason that we
were stopped and expelled beyond a distance of thirty meters
therefrom by Constabulary guards and the whole municipal police
corps who would not admit us to the polling place and alleged that in
prohibiting our entrance thereto they were obeying orders given them
by the municipal president and presiding officer of the so-styled
election board which, according to said guards, was lawfully
assembled. Therefore, we, the undersigned inspectors, for the purpose
of avoiding our being held in any way liable under the law, had to seek
the protection of the municipal president, and, after he had conferred
with the Constabulary lieutenant, the fictitious inspectors permitted us,
the undersigned, to enter said polling place, whereupon we took the
required oath and requested of said municipal president that said
intrusive inspectors be expelled and that he oblige them to deliver to
us all the documents, minutes, ballots, and other official papers
concerning the election, but said intrusive inspectors refused to deliver
the same and likewise their possession of the polling place, and
notwithstanding that the municipal president ordered the policemen to
eject them from the polling place, these officers refused to comply with
the municipal president's orders, which refusal was countenanced and
approved by the chief of police who also refused to obey these orders.
"'In view of these facts, we, the undersigned legally appointed
inspectors, had to remain in the polling place and officially confer with
the municipal president to the end that the intrusive inspectors
Esteban Mendoza, Doroteo Totañes, Balbino Frondoso, and the poll
clerk Quintin Bona, might permit compliance and themselves comply
with the orders given by said municipal president, so as not to waste
time in detriment to the holding of the election. But said intruders were
obstinate and refused to permit the election to be held and by such
obstructive acts prevented the fulfillment of the provisions of the
Election Law until the hour of 5 p.m. arrived, at which hour the law
directs that the polls shall be closed, and as a result of said obstruction
the electors who had been waiting since the morning were unable to
vote until 5 p. m.
"'Wherefore, we hereby make record of the foregoing facts in
order to avoid the very serious liability which the law might exact of us.
"'In witness whereof we, all the members of the election board,
sign these presents, which I, the poll clerk, certify.
"'Signed: Gaudencio Presentacion.—Gil Forteza.—Manuel
Ledesma.—Ananias Obias.—Elections Inspectors and Poll Clerk.—Ibo
Alvarez.—Elector.—Pedro Demesa.—Elector.— Sofronio Bautista.—
Elector.—Macario Ledesma.— Elector.'
"The previous election board formed by Esteban Mendoza,
Balbino Frondoso, Doroteo Totañes, and Quintin Bona, whose
appointment, as aforestated, was judicially declared to be invalid, null,
and void, willfully disregarding the court's decision, to which it did not
except in due time and form, and being in possession of the ballots,
documents and other things necessary for the election, proceeded to
hold said election by opening the polls some time between 9 and 10
o'clock at night of the 6th day of June and closing them at about 5
o'clock in the afternoon of the next day, the 7th, with some
interruption, for the purpose of getting a little rest, lasting until about
the dawn of the day last mentioned.
"At these elections more than 8 duly qualified and registered
electors were unable to vote and did not vote, either because of the
considerable delay or, more properly speaking, by reason of the
change of time in the opening of the polls, or because they knew that
the persons who were acting as election inspectors and poll clerk had
been dismissed from office by an order of this court, or because of both
reasons.
"These facts are fully sustained by the evidence. Nevertheless,
the protestee argues that the reason why the election was delayed is
because the protestant, together with the municipal president Pedro
Demesa, the justice of the peace Ibo Alvarez, the municipal secretary
Sofronio Bautista, and more than fifty other persons, assaulted the
polling place, molested the election inspectors, and tried by force to
take away from them the ballot boxes, ballots, and other papers
pertaining to the board of inspectors, and because such assaulters
were within the polling place from the time the polls were opened until
7 o'clock in the evening of the 6th, at which hour the inspectors above
mentioned were free to hold and continue the election. The protestee
also asserts that Esteban Mendoza and the latter's companions were
de facto election officers, since they had not been duly notified of the
decision of this court in which it was held that their appointment was
null and void and of no value.
"The most impartial testimony relative to these facts is without
doubt that given by Porfirio Zablan, Constabulary lieutenant, who had
been assigned to do service on the day of the elections in the towns of
Sagnay, Tigaon, Goa, San Jose, and Lagonoy, and who had a hand in
the matter. The relevant part of his testimony is as follows:
"'A. While the justice of the peace was talking, the municipal
president arrived, informed me that Esteban Mendoza and his (the
latter's) companions were not the genuine election inspectors, and
requested me to remove these inspectors and gather up the papers so
as to deliver them to him. I replied to him that I had nothing to do in
the matter, and that I was there solely for the purpose of keeping
order. He then told me that there was an order of the court, signed by
the clerk of the court Mr. Cortes, which he, the municipal president,
wished to be complied with. He also told me that he wished that order
to be obeyed, but that he was powerless to force obedience to it. I then
suggested to him that, as official head of the town, he had the police
under his orders, and he replied that the police would not obey him.
When I inquired of the chief of police about this, he told me that he was
willing to obey the municipal president. Then the municipal president
told me that he was going to suggest our proposal to the new
inspectors, to which I said that I had no objection. He went to the
polling place with four men, thereof whom were the inspectors and the
fourth the poll clerk. Fearing that there might be a disturbance, I went
up the stairs leading to the polling place and remained at the landing of
the stairway. When I arrived, there was a discussion between the
persons who had recently come and those already there.
"'Q. Who were those who were already there? A. Mendoza and his
companions. This discussion or conversation continued, and after a
little while I heard a noise as if something fell to the floor, then I heard
men from both sides call out, "Police, police." I entered and told them
that was enough, and that they might proceed with order. I also
informed them that I would arrest and put in jail anyone who disturb
order there. Both parties asked protection of me. Mendoza and his
companions requested me to protect them, and the last appointed
inspectors asked me to expel the first appointed inspectors, and vice
versa. I told them that I had nothing to do with the proceedings of the
inspectors, and that I was not there to put anyone in as inspector or to
remove anyone and put in somebody else in his place. Then Mendoza
asked me to put out the new inspectors so that he and those who had
been appointed with him might continue with the elections, as they
were the true inspectors. I told them again that I had nothing to do
with the elections. The new inspectors told me there was an order by
the court to the effect that they were the true inspectors. Mendoza
replied: "I have not been notified of anything. I know nothing of it. The
fact is that I have been appointed inspector and have signed for the
papers and documents, for which I am responsible." While Mendoza
was saying that he knew nothing of that order, the municipal president
showed it, saying: Here it is.
"The above quoted testimony is corroborated not only by that of
other witnesses presented by the protestant but also and chiefly by the
very testimony given by Esteban Mendoza, Balbino Frondoso, and
Doroteo Totañes.
"There is no justification, nor can there be any, for the conduct
observed by these men, Esteban Mendoza and his companions, after
they had been duly requested by the municipal president and by the
new election inspectors and the new poll clerk to leave the polling
place and deliver to said inspectors and poll clerk the papers,
documents, and other paraphernalia pertaining to the elections, and
that conduct shows nothing but a disregard of the law, contempt to the
order issued by this court and to the authority of the municipal
president, and actual resistance on their part in order that they might
not give up their position as election inspectors and poll clerk.
"But, aside from all this, the elections held in the single precinct
of Lagonoy under the direction of those men, Mendoza and his
companions, were actually conducted from between 9 and 10 o'clock of
the night of June 6th until 5 o'clock in the afternoon of the following
day, June 7th, 1916.
"Pursuant to Section 543 of the Administrative Code, at all the
elections held under the provisions of this chapter the polls shall be
open from seven o'clock in the morning until six in the afternoon; and,
according to Section 494 of the same Code, the day set for the holding
of the general election is the first Tuesday in June of every leap year.
"The elections at Lagonoy, presided over by Esteban Mendoza
and his companions, are to be considered as having been held on
Wednesday, the 7th of June, inasmuch as the principal part of the
voting was done on that day, instead of on Tuesday, June 6th, or, as
the protestee avers, the polls were opened at 7 o'clock of the morning
of the 7th. In either case, it necessarily follows that the elections are
null and void.
"This conclusion is clearly drawn from the language of the
provision contained in Section 495 of the Administrative Code,
pursuant to which an election may be postponed by the Governor-
General with the consent of the Upper House of the Philippine
Legislature, for such time as is deemed necessary, only when there is
rebellion, sedition, brigandage, epidemic, public calamity or analogous
cause which makes the holding of the election impossible or
impracticable.
"This means that, outside of the cases provided for and without
an express order by the Governor-General, with the consent of the
Senate, in no other case and by no other authority can the holding of
an election be postponed.
"What occurred in Lagonoy on June 6, 1916, is far from being one
of the reasons specified as a lawful cause for postponement, and
Esteban Mendoza and his companions had absolutely no authority to
provide that the election should be held at a different hour and on a
different day from those fixed by law.
"If there should still be any doubt on this point, it would be
dissipated merely by a citation of the following authorities, among
others, and of the following legal doctrine:
"'The time for the holding of an election is of the substance of it;
and an election held at a time not fixed by law itself or by a person
authorized to do so, must be declared to be null and void.' (15 Cyc.,
341.)
"'Those provisions of law which fix the time or place of holding
elections are to be construed as mandatory, . . .. As to the time of the
election, of course the day cannot be changed even by the consent of
all the voters, and the general rule is, that if the polls are not kept open
for as many hours as the law directs, and if legal voters in numbers
sufficient to change the result, or to render it doubtful, are thereby
deprived of the privilege of voting, the election must be set aside. A
few minutes' delay in opening the polls will make no difference, but
several hours' delay may render the election void, and certainly will
have that effect if the party complaining of it can show that he has
been injured thereby.' (McCrary, p. 125; Villamor, par. 617.)
"In the instant case it is not a question of a few hours' delay, but
of there having been legal voters in sufficient number (more than 80)
to have changed the result or rendered it doubtful, who could not vote
or failed to do so.
"According to the motion, the protestee had in this municipality
91 votes, Andres Garchitorena, the protestant, 30 and certainly the 80
or more voters who could not or did not vote would have, had they
voted for Andres Garchitorena, produced a majority for him, and not for
the protestee, or at least their number was such as to render the
protestee's triumph doubtful in the municipality of Lagonoy, a fact
which of course has a great bearing on the total recount.
"Having arrived at this conclusion, the court believes that it is
unnecessary to discuss the various other questions concerned in this
matter, such as those that pertain to the irregularities of the election.
"Therefore, as the elections held in Lagonoy were null and void,
which elections were held, presided over by Esteban Mendoza and his
companions, for the purpose of filling among other offices, that of
provincial governor of the province of Ambos Camarines, for and during
the term beginning on October 16, 1916, the court decides that the
election returns of the single precinct of Lagonoy should be, as they
hereby are, rejected.
"Municipality of Minalabac.
"The protestant alleges in his motion:
"'(a) That in this precinct 34 electors duly inscribed in the
registration list of the same failed to vote on the day of the election,
not through any fault of theirs nor waiver of their rights, but through
the want of official ballots, for, at about 2 o'clock in the afternoon of
said day, while said 34 electors were in front of the polling place ready
to vote, the board of inspectors of this precinct informed them that the
supply of official ballots transmitted to it was exhausted, wherefore it
was obliged to suspend the voting with a view to resuming the same
upon the arrival of more official ballots which had been requisitioned
from the proper authorities. Said 34 electors awaited in vain the arrival
of those requisitioned ballots, and until the next day, when, due to their
failure to arrive, the canvass was proceeded with. Thus were said
electors deprived of the exercise of the right of suffrage.'
"At the hearing, the protestee stated that he would offer no
objection to an annulment of the election in the municipality, as the
facts alleged in the motion were true. The record bears no evidence of
the number of electors registered in Minalabac, but, having in sight the
certificate of the canvass made by the provincial board (which
accompanies the motion as exhibit A, and according to which the votes
obtained by each candidate for the office of governor are: Manuel
Crescini none; Andres Garchitorena 10; Engracio B. Imperial 8; and
Francisco Botor 63), it is seen that 34 duly registered electors is a
considerable number for the precinct of Minalabac, and the fact of their
being unable to vote, despite their desire do so, has undoubtedly
affected the result of the elections in this municipality.
"It is therefore held that the elections conducted in the single
election precinct of Minalabac are null and void, and the votes cast at
said elections for the protestant and the protestee should not be
counted in the general canvass of all the votes cast in the province.
"Municipality of Mambulao.
"In this municipality the question at issue merely concerns the
revision of the 19 ballots rejected by the inspectors during the canvass
and which are now claimed by the protestant. The protestee, in turn,
claims two ballots of those rejected by the inspectors and challenges
six of those counted as for the protestant. After an examination of
these ballots the court decides:
"That the following ballots should be and are hereby admitted:
No. 2, 'Andres Gachitorena ;' No. 3, same as No. 2; No. 4, 'Andres
Gathetorina;' No. 6, 'Andes Garcitorina;' No. 7, 'Andres Garchotorrena;'
No. 2 [12 ?], 'Andres Gatsiturina;' No. 13, 'Andres Garchetorina;' No.
14, 'Andres Gatcitorina;' No. 15, 'Andres Garchtorena;' No. 16, 'Andres
Garchitorina;' and No. 17, 'Andres Garchiturina.' In all, eleven votes.
"That the rest of the ballots claimed, wherein appears the name
'Aandreso,' or 'Andreson,' or 'Andrisson,' or even that of 'Andres
Garchitorena' in the space allotted for the name of the candidate for
representative, should be and are hereby rejected.
"That, of the six (6) ballots challenged by the protestee, four (4)
are admitted and counted as for Andres Garchitorena. The remaining
two (2) are rejected.
"That the two ballots rejected by the inspectors during the
canvass and claimed by the protestee as legal votes cast for him are
admitted.
"Municipality of Nabua.
"The protest made with respect to this municipality alleges that:
"'The liberality of the procedure had in the election precincts of Bato
and Iriga, whereby the votes of more than 300 electors were admitted after
the hours for the closing of the polls (6 p. m. on the day of the elections),
was not observed by the election board of the precinct of Nabua, for two of
the inspectors of the latter precinct, whose names are Juan Vega and Juan
Goleta, partisans of the protestee, decided, in face of the opposition and
dissidence of the other inspector Luis Ocampo, a partisan of the protestant,
not to have the polls remain open after 6 p.m., for which reason more than
80 electors registered in this precinct failed to vote therein, notwithstanding
that they were all present and in front of the polling place at that hour ready
to vote. These tactics on the part of the majority of the board of inspectors of
Nabua, very different from those followed by the boards of inspectors of
Bato and Iriga, were adopted in view of the fact that not all the election
inspectors of Nabua were partisans of the protestant, and besides because
the protestee knew that a great majority of the electors of Nabua were
partisans of the protestant.'
"The protest was practically abandoned, inasmuch as the parties did
not produce any proof in support of their respective allegations, the
protestant, in his motion, and the protestee, in his answer. On the other
hand, considering as true the facts alleged, it is clearly seen that the
procedure had was not contrary to law, and that there is no evidence that
the elections held in the single precinct of Nabua were in any manner
vitiated.
"Municipality of Sagnay.
"The protest as regards this municipality is founded on the
following facts alleged in the motion:
"'(a) The polling station of this precinct was in the upper story of
a house. Its two booths were separated one from the other only by a
screen; they had no walls on two of their sides, and no doors, so that
their inside could be seen from the outside. Thus, the voters while
preparing their ballots in these booths were in everybody's view. This
polling place was not provided with the guard rail required by law for
the due separation of the public from the ballot boxes and the booths.
"'(b) Notwithstanding the fact that 195 electors were registered
in this precinct, only two booths, as aforesaid, were constructed and
provided, and 188 electors prepared their ballots and voted in these
only two booths.
"'(c) The election inspectors of this precinct, Constancio Cater,
Roque Caneo, and Jose Tria, denied the public and the electors access
to the polls and to any place within a radius of 30 meters therefrom
during the voting. The electors who in a crowd were awaiting their turn
to vote, stationed at a distance of 30 meters away, were called to the
polls one by one by name, not in the alphabetical order of their name
but capriciously as best suited the inspectors themselves.
"'(d) All and every one of said inspectors were and are steadfast
partisans a the protestee, and during the voting worked so much to
favor him that they did not restrict their efforts to mere electioneering,
as they did electioneer, within the polling I ace and the voting booths,
but also availed themselves of threats and force to compel the
electors, while these were preparing their ballots, to vote for the
protestee.
"'(e) When the electors who could read and write went to the
booths to vote, said inspectors followed them in, in order to see ,and
witness the preparation of these electors' ballots, and there in the
booths did electioneering, and used threats and force upon the electors
to induce them to vote for the protestee. The names of such electors so
unduly and unlawfully influenced, as alleged in this paragraph and in
the next preceding one, are: Filomeno Austria, Graciano Jallores, and
Potenciano Cortes, and there are still other whose names are at this
moment unknown to the protestant.
"'(f) Said inspectors prepared the ballots of the illiterate voters
without inquiring of them or consulting them as to whom they desired
to vote for, and after the ballots had been prepared tie inspectors
themselves, folded them and, without showing their contents to the
respective electors for whom they had been written, deposited them in
the ballot box, ordering the latter immediately to leave the polling
place.
"'(g) The inspectors themselves prepared the ballots of the
illiterate voters and of those who were physically unable to write,
without previously requiring of them and having them take the oath
prescribed by law.
"'(h) During the canvass of the ballots, the watchers there
present noticed that a large majority of the ballots read had been
prepared by only three or four different persons, as shown by their
handwriting; that many electors who could read and write were unable
to identify their own ballots, though they were attentive to said
canvass; and that, on the recount of the ballots, 190 of them duly
prepared were found, notwithstanding that only 188 electors voted.
Such facts cause the protestant to believe, and he so alleges, that
many ballots were substituted for others prepared beforehand.
"'(i) Before the opening of the polls, and on the same 6th day of
June, the municipal president Roque Gacer, and the municipal
treasurer Zo. Fortuno, of said municipality of Sagnay, bought a new
trunk to serve as a ballot box and delivered it to the inspectors. Upon
delivery it was intact in all respects, as was also its lock, and it was in
fact used as a ballot box. After the canvass of the votes, the lock of this
trunk was in a broken condition, could not be opened or closed, and
said inspectors deposited the used ballots in another ballot box, an old
one.'
"At the time of the presentation of the motion, the court, in
conformity with law, ordered that the election registration lists and the
ballots used in the election be immediately produced before him and
examined, and appointed the commissioners necessary for this
purpose.
"The ballot boxes of Sagnay containing the ballots and all of the
other documents used in the contested elections were brought to the
court and placed at the disposal of the appointed commissioners for
examination. The result of this examination, as recorded in the minutes
or report of the commission, is given herein below in detail:
"'PRECINCT OF SAGNAY.
"'It is hereby certified that the ballot boxes of said precinct were
completely covered with thick paper on all their sides except one,
which paper apparently was so placed for the purpose of transmitting
the boxes to the court, for no seal or signature of any inspector
appears thereon. When the inspectors were called before the
commission to identify the ballot boxes, they stated that they could not
do so until said paper covering was removed, and that they did not put
on this covering.
"'The paper covering the sides of the ballot boxes was removed.
"'When the inspectors were again called, they said that the blank
paper that closed the ballot boxes was not in the same condition as
that in which same had been left by them, it appearing that the boxes
were opened and that afterwards a strip of white paper was put on
over the union of the cover and the box proper.
"'The commissioners decided to exhibit the ballot boxes to the
court and this was immediately done . . ..
"'. . . It was discovered that one of these ballot boxes was
entirely empty. In the other ballot box the following documents were
found: Two packages of the ballots tied together with dry grass and
several loose ballots. An examination of the latter in the presence of
the parties showed this result:
Loose ballots containing two names only, for the
offices of municipal president and governor 56
Loose ballots marked on their reverse side as
2
extra ballots
Loose ballot marked on their reverse side as
ballots
spoiled by the inspectors 1
—
Total 59
"'"Then the package tied with dry grass, the covering of which is
marked with the letter A, was opened and was found to contain 51
ballots.
"'"Afterwards the other package, also tied with dry grass and the
covering of which is marked with the letter B, was opened and was
found to contain 87 ballots.
"'"In recapitulation. In this precinct there were found:
Loose ballots 59
Ballots in the package A 51
Ballots in the package B 87
——
Total 197
"'"According to the information given by the provincial treasurer,
290 official blank ballots were transmitted to the municipal treasurer of
Sagnay. There is therefore a shortage of 93 ballots.
"'"The commission then proceeded to inspect the election returns
furnished by the provincial fiscal. Said returns show the 188 electors
voted; that the number of ballots found in the ballot box was 190; that
there were two ballots marked 'Extra ballot;' that one ballot was
rejected as having been marked; and that there were 42 ballots listed
as marked but not as rejected.
"'"According to said returns, the result of the voting for the office
Manuel Crescini 173
Severo Cea 1
Sulpicio Cea 1
Honesto Obias 1
—
Total 187
"'"The parties then proceeded to separate their respective ballots
with the following result:
Ballots for Manuel Crescini, not
125
challenged
Ballots for Manuel Crescini, challenged 5
Ballots for Andres Garchitorena, not
6
challenged
Ballots for Andres Garchitorena,
2
challenged
——
Total 138
"'"Two books used by the inspectors and containing the list of
registered voters were also found inside the ballot box. . . ."'
"So that, as has been seen, the ballot boxes of Sangay were
violated. Forty-nine of the used ballots disappeared, and no account
was rendered of 93 blank ballots. The fact of the violation was not
discussed by the parties, only they do not agree as to the place where
the violation was committed, nor as to what person or persons
perpetrated it.
"On the other hand, the election returns of Sagnay are not only
assailed as false, but they are also by themselves proof of their falsity
and to the extent that the election inspectors of said municipality are
at present under prosecution for the falsification of these returns
(Criminal Case No. 2721 of this court). Said returns clearly show the
alterations made in them by erasing the sums of the votes originally
written as the result of the canvass, and recording in their place a
lesser number, as regards one candidate, that is to say, by reducing
his votes, and a larger number, as regards the rival candidate, thus
making it appear that the latter received more votes.
"It is true that this manifest falsification now under consideration
has reference to another office different from that of governor, but at
all event it shows the unquestionable fact of the very falsification of the
election returns, which taint deprives them of their probatory value,
renders them unworthy of credence, and destroys all the confidence
that should be inspired by the official acts of the election inspectors of
Sagnay.
"In connection with this matter, due account should be taken of
the following legal doctrines and authorities:
"'. . . Where it has been established that a fair and honest
election was held, none but the gravest irregularities will avoid the
election: such as might be said to raise a presumption of fraud. But
where the election board has committed irregularities fraudulently,
they need not be serious or numerous. The position and duties of an
election board is one where much must be left to the honesty and
integrity of its members. Many of its acts must be accepted as true
even though false, for the reason that no adequate proof can be
secured of their falsity. The law has, however, outlined its duties with
some care; and fraudulent practices kept within bounds can not, as a
rule, assume large proportions. Nor can fraud be practiced in many
directions without asserting itself at some point or other. So that from
the very difficulty of following all the movements of the board, a grave
suspicion immediately arises as to its honesty of purpose when once a
fraud chargeable to it has been discovered. The thought immediately
suggests itself, if fraud was committed here, it is probable that it was
also committed there, where it can not be proved except by the
confession of the inspectors themselves. The general rule is that a
witness found to be a willful perjurer on a material point is thereby
thoroughly discredited. The same rule should apply to the record made
by an election board. Said record is prima facie evidence of the results
of the election, guaranteed by the familiar presumption that public
officials have done their duty. But once fraud is proved upon an
important point, the party claiming under it must present his proofs.
Such is the rule, more strongly stated, however, by McCrary on
Elections Section 641 et seq.:
"'The safe rule, probably, is that where an election board is
found to have willfully and deliberately committed a fraud, even
though it affect a number of votes too small to change the result, it is
sufficient to destroy all confidence in its official acts, and to put the
party claiming anything under the election conducted by it to the proof
of his votes by evidence other than the return.' (See Londoner vs.
People, 15 Colo., 557; and Gardiner vs. Romulo, 26 Phil. Rep., 521.)
"'An election return is prima facie evidence of everything the law
requires it to contain, until it is shown to be fraudulent and false and
then it falls to the ground; for although there is great danger of
disfranchising innocent legal voters a return which is shown to be
utterly untrustworthy must be rejected as evidence of the result.
Although there may have been some fraudulent voting at an election,
yet where the officers who conducted it did not participate in the fraud,
but endeavored to hold the election according to law, their returns are
prima facie evidence of all they contain, subject, however, to be
corrected by proof; but where their returns are successfully impeached
for fraud in them they are unworthy of credit and are evidence of
nothing except that a poll was opened. But while the exercise of the
power to discard the entire return of an election precinct is a public
necessity and is sustained by abundant authority, it should be
exercised with great caution and only as the last resort.' (15 Cyc., 418.)
"'Although the general rule is that the ballots themselves are the
best evidence of the number of votes cast, and for whom cast, yet this
rule can have no application to a case where the ballots have been
tampered with after they were deposited in the ballot box. In such a
case the value of the ballots as evidence is almost totally destroyed, . .
..' (McCrary, par. 474; and Villamor, par. 1054.)
"'It was proved that the ballot boxes of the municipality of Alava
were violated, and the effect of that violation is to annul all the ballots
used and cast in the municipal election of said town, for, by reason of
the facts here described these ballots have lost all their probatory
value.' (Generao vs. Dispo, of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan;
and Villamor, par. 1062.)
"In this precinct of Sagnay the returns were falsified, the ballot
boxes were violated, the ballots were visibly altered and 49 used
ballots which should have been counted disappeared, and in place
thereof appear 56 others which bear evidence of having been
maliciously written by partisans of the protestee for the purpose of
putting the protestant in a bad light, and, according to the report made
by the commission, no account was rendered of the large number of
missing ballots, amounting to ninety-three (93).
"If to all that we add some of the other irregularities alleged in
the motion have also been proven, such as the inadequate condition of
the polling place, the voting booths and the insufficient number of the
latter, the electioneering and threats made within these places, and
the unlawful taking away of some votes cast for Andres Garchitorena—
for several witnesses, whose number is greater than that shown in the
returns as that of those who voted for Garchitorena testified that they
did vote for this candidate—it will be seen that the case of Sagnay is
one of those which justify recourse to the last resort mentioned in the
doctrine above quoted.
"Therefore, the elections held in the single precinct of Sagnay, on

the 6th day of June, 1916, are declared null and void, and the returns
thereof shall not be taken into account for the purposes of the general
canvass of all the votes cast in the province.
"In recapitulation and as a result of the findings hereinabove: The
returns rendered by five of the eleven (11) municipalities affected by
the protest are rejected, that is, the elections had in these five
municipalities are annulled. These municipalities and their respective
annulled or rejected votes are the following:
(As per the provincial returns) —
Votes.
Bato 331
Iriga, 3rd precinct 962
Lagonoy 127
Minalabac 81
Sagnay 184
Total 1,685
"According to the provincial returns which accompany the
motion, the total number of votes cast in the whole province for the
office of provincial governor is 8,312, distributed among the following
candidates voted for: Manuel Crescini 3,198; Andres Garchitorena
2,468; Engracio B. Imperial 1,954; and Francisco Botor 692. According
to this, the protestee Manuel Crescini has over the protestant Andres
Garchitorena a majority of 730 votes.
"Now, coming to the general canvass of the votes cast in the
entire province, or the recount of the votes in accordance with the
pronouncements made in this decision, the result attained is that given
in the following table, excluding the last candidate Francisco Botor:
Crescini Garchito- Imperial Annulled
rena
1. Baao 126 5 7 --------

2. Basud 38 42 5 --------
3. Bato 0 0 0 331
4. Buhi 186 52 17 84
5. Bula 13 44 30 --------
6. Cabusao 15 54 37 --------
7. Calabanga 45 62 78 108
8. Camaligan 0 74 79 --------
9. Canaman 0 34 60 --------
10. Capalonga 6 11 48 --------
11. Caramoan 21 181 71 --------
12. Daet 182 198 40 --------
13. Gainza 6 42 11 --------
14. Goa 65 145 6 --------
15. Indan 86 6 37 --------
16. Iriga 0 0 0 962
17. Labo 94 12 134 --------
18. Lagonoy 0 0 0 127
19. Libmanan 144 71 92 --------
20. Lupi 2 64 5 --------
21. Magarao 10 147 57 --------
22. Mambulao 2 82 23 --------
23. Milaor 61 26 3 --------
24. Minalabac 110 110 0 81
25. Nabua 110 164 53 --------
26. Naga 38 185 348 --------
27. Pamplona 5 40 13 --------
28. Paracale 5 52 60 --------
29. Pasacao 26 24 14 --------
30. Pili 3 2 176 --------
31. Ragay 11 38 87 --------
32. Sagnay 0 0 0 184
San
33. 0 40 56 --------
Fernando
34. San Jose 1 187 12 --------
35. San Vicente 36 2 23 --------
36. Sipocot 2 29 105 --------
37. Siruma 0 7 44 --------
38. Talisay 11 44 43 --------
39. Tigaon 79 148 15 --------
40. Tinambac 49 75 20 --------
———
Total 1,478 2,409 1,909 1,877
"From the preceding canvass or recount of the votes, it appears
that the protestant Andres Garchitorena obtained a majority of the
legal votes cast in the forty municipalities of the province of Ambos
Camarines for the office of provincial governor, and a plurality over the
protestee of nine hundred and thirty-one votes.
"It also appears therefrom that the votes cast in the five
municipalities whose elections have been declared null and void or
have been rejected are equivalent to 20 per cent of the total number of
those cast in the entire province.
"In view of this fact, the question arises as to whether it would be
proper to order the provincial board to correct the canvass in such a
way that it shall declare the protestant elected by awarding him a
plurality of 931 votes, or whether on the contrary it should be certified
that the election is voided as regards the office of provincial governor
of the province of Ambos Camarines.
"In the case of Gardiner vs. Romulo, supra, the Supreme Court
held:
"'The returns from a municipality which comprised twenty-five
per cent of the electors of the province were rejected in view of the
serious irregularities committed in the manner of holding the election,
and because of frauds and intimidation played upon the electors, which
gave the protestant a small majority. Seventy-five per cent of the
electors and eleven out of the twelve municipalities of the province
participated in the obtainment of this majority. Held: That it is not
sufficient to justify the holding of a new election in the whole province,
in view of the fact that the winning candidate by the prima facie
returns and his partisans were largely responsible for the conditions
that prevailed in said municipality on the day of the election.'
"In the present case, although it is held that thirty-five of the
forty municipalities of the province participated in the obtainment of
the majority, that is, a proportion less than that resulting from the
relation between eleven and twelve, it also appears that not only
seventy-five but eighty per cent of the electors of the province
contributed to the obtainment of said majority. In this respect then it is
held that the fact of the rejection of the returns from five
municipalities, which comprise 20 per cent of the electors of the
province, is not a sufficient reason to justify a new election.
"It is said however in the aforecited decision that in view of the
fact that the winning candidates by the prima facie returns and his
partisans were largely responsible for the conditions that prevailed in
said municipality on the day of the election," (p. 85.) the intention
being undoubtedly to give it to be understood that, were it not for that
circumstance, it would have been held that a new election was
justifiable.
"This brings us to a discussion as to whether or not the protestee
or his declared partisans were responsible for the fatal irregularities
and illegalities which served as a ground of reason for the court's
rejection of the returns from entire precincts.
"Aside from the irregularities relative to the installation of the
three polling places of Iriga, and to the construction of the voting
booths and ballot boxes used therein, for which perhaps the protestee
may be held responsible by reason of his official character as municipal
president of said municipality of Iriga (although there is evidence that
the vice-president acted at the time), there is nothing in the record to
show conclusively that Manuel Crescini participated directly or
indirectly in the illegalities and frauds committed by the respective
election inspectors, nor is it evidence that such inspectors (excepting
perhaps Jose Crescini, one of the inspectors of Buhi) were his the
protestee's declared partisans. This was alleged in the motion and
some evidence bearing on this matter was produced but the court does
not deem sufficient the more or less reasonable conjectures or
deductions of the witnesses.
"At all events, and although it be said besides, as it should be
said, that, after all, legal votes were cast for Manuel Crescini in Iriga
and in the other municipalities, for undoubtedly there were many
electors who honestly believed that he was the best candidate for the
office of provincial governor, yet it is also unquestionable that in a
certain way he is responsible for the conditions which prevailed in his
municipality on the day of the elections and so much the more that the
polling places were located near his residence and were consequently
within his close watch.
"This being the case, and it being a well settled general rule that
an election ought not to be annulled except as a last resort, and,
further, it being easily possible to separate, as was done in the
recount, the vitiated from the legal votes, among all the votes cast in
the entire province, the court can do nothing but put into effect the will
of the majority, freely, honestly and legally expressed.
"For all the foregoing reasons the court decides that he should
order, as he hereby does, the provincial board of canvassers, as soon
as it shall receive a certified copy of this decision, which immediately
upon becoming final, should be transmitted to it by the clerk of this
court, to proceed to correct, in conformity with the pronouncements
made in this decision, the returns of the elections held in the forty
municipalities' of this province, and to declare the protestant Andres
Garchitorena legally elected to the office of provincial governor of
Ambos Camarines for the rest of the present term of office which began
on October 16, 1916. The protestee is ordered to pay the costs of this
action, excepting those that pertain to the municipalities of Buhi and
Lagonoy, as they have already been adjusted in the respective
municipal protests.
"The clerk of the court is ordered to send a certified copy of this
decision to the Executive Secretary, for such purposes as the law
requires, and further to refer said decision to the Attorney-General so
that the latter may take such measures against the election inspectors
for their violation or violations of law, as may be warranted by the
pronouncements herein or by his investigation.
"So ordered.
"Given at Naga, Ambos Camarines, on March 27, 1917.
MAXIMINO MINA,
Auxillary Judge, 4th Group.
"EXHIBIT B.
"[United States of America, Philippine Islands. In the Court of First
Instance of Ambos Camarines, fifteenth Judicial District. Election
Protest.]
"ANDRES GARCHITORENA, petitioner, versus MANUEL CRESCINI,
respondent.
"DECISION.
"On June 21, 1916, the provincial board of Ambos Camarines
acting as a provincial board of canvassers certified that the result of
the elections held in said province on the 6th day of June, 1916, to fill
the office of provincial governor, was the following: Manuel Crescini
3,198 votes: Andres Garchitorena 2,468; Engracio B. Imperial 1,954;
and Francisco Botor 692. In consequence thereof, it proclaimed as
governor-elect of Ambos Camarines the triumphant candidate Manuel
Crescini. Against said result of the elections, one of the defeated
candidates, Andres Garchitorena, presented in due time before this
court a motion of protest which having passed through all the process
required by law, is now submitted to the considerations of this court in
order that, by virtue of the instruction, of the Supreme Court, this lower
court render judgment after an examination of the evidence so far
adduced and which is made a part of the record in accordance with the
law and the facts.
"Municipality of Capalonga.
"This is one of the municipalities affected by the protest in which
it is averred that in this precinct the protestant obtained 11 votes for
provincial governor and notwithstanding the provincial board of this
province, in making the general canvass, awarded him only one vote
according to the tabulation made by said board of the result of the
election by precincts.
"There was no need of taking evidence in order to explain the
facts alleged in the protest. At the hearing the case the protestee
admitted that in fact the provincial board of canvassers incurred an
error in recording on one vote instead of eleven for the protestant.
Therefore the court decides that, with reference to the elections
held in the municipality of Capalonga, he should award, as he hereby
does, 11 votes to Andres Garchitorena and 6 votes to Manuel Crescini.
"Municipality of Minalabac.
"This is another of the municipalities affected by the protest in
which it is set forth that 'in this precinct electors duly inscribed in the
election register of the municipality failed to vote on the day of the
election, not through any fault of theirs, nor waiver of their rights, but
because of the want of official ballots, for, at about 2 o'clock in the
afternoon of said day, when said 34 electors were in front of the polling
place ready to vote, the board of inspectors of this precinct informed
them that the supply of official ballots transmitted to it was exhausted,
wherefore it was obliged to suspend the voting with a view to resuming
the same upon the arrival of more official ballots which had been
requisitioned from the proper authorities. Said 34 electors awaited in
vain the arrival of those requisitioned ballots until the next day when,
due to their failure to arrive, the canvass was proceeded with. Thus
were said electors deprived of the exercise of the right of suffrage.'
"Neither was there need of taking any evidence with respect to
these allegations of the protest because at the hearing of the case the
protestee consented to an annulment of the elections held in this
municipality of Minalabac, on the ground that the facts alleged in the
motion were true.
"The record does not disclose the number of electors registered
in Minalabac; but according to the canvass made by the provincial
board, the votes obtained by each candidate for the office of governor
are as follows: Manuel Crescini none; Andres Garchitorena 10; Engracio
B. Imperial 8; and Francisco Botor 63. So that the total number of votes
deposited in the ballot boxes was 81. Comparing this number of votes
with the number of the electors, 34, who were unable to vote through
no fault of their own and in spite of their vehement desire to do so, I
find that more than 40% of the registered electors were unjustly
deprived of their right to vote, and this of course affects the result of
the election.
"Therefore, the court declares and decides that the election held
in the municipality of Minalabac should be, as it is hereby, annulled.
"Municipality of Mambulao.
"This is another of the municipalities affected by the protest
which, with respect to Mambulao, just as in regard to Capalonga, is
solely directed against errors committed by the board of inspectors in
the canvass of the votes. The question here raised solely concerns the
revision of the 19 ballots rejected by the board of inspectors during the
canvass and which are now claimed by the protestant. The protestee in
turn claims two ballots of those rejected by the inspectors and
challenges 6 ballots of those counted for the protestant.
"Upon an examination of said ballots, the court decides that he
should admit, and does admit, the following ballots: No. 2, 'Andres
Gachitorena ;' No. 3, same as No. 2; No. 4, 'Andres Gathetorina ;' No. 6,
'Andes Garcitorina ;' No. 7, 'Andres Garchotorrena ;' No. 12, 'Andres
Gatsiturina;' No. 13, 'Andres Garchetorina;' No. 14, 'Andres
Garchitorina ;' no. 15, 'Andres Garchtorena ;' No. 16, 'Andres
Garchitorina ;' and No. 17, 'Andres Garchiturina.' That makes 11 votes.
"The court also decides that he should reject, as he hereby does,
the rest of the ballots claimed whereon appear the names of 'Aandreso'
or 'Andreson' or 'Andrisson,' or even 'Andres Garchtoreno,' where the
latter was written on the line intended for the name of a candidate for
the office of representative.
"Of the 6 ballots challenged by the protestee, 4 are admitted and
counted for Andres Garchitorena, and 2 are rejected.
"The 2 ballots rejected by the inspectors during the canvass and
claimed by the protestee as legal votes cast for him are admitted.
"So that the canvass of the votes cast in Mambulao instead of
bearing record of no votes for Manuel Crescini and 73 votes for Andres
Garchitorena, should be as follows: Manuel Crescini, 2 votes; and
Andres Garchitorena, 82.
"Municipality of Nabua.
"The following allegations are made in the protest against the
election held in this municipality: 'The liberality of the procedure had in
the election precincts of Bato and Iriga, whereby the votes of more
than 300 electors were admitted after the hour for the closing of the
polls (6 p. m. on the day of the elections), was not observed by the
election board of the precinct of Nabua, for two of the inspectors of the
latter precinct, whose names are Juan Vega and Juan Goleta, partisans
of the protestee, decided, in face of the opposition and dissidence of
the other inspector Luis Ocampo, a partisan of the protestant, not to
have the polls remain open after 6 p. m., for which reason more than
80 electors registered in this precinct failed to vote therein,
notwithstanding that they were all present and in front of the polling
place at that hour ready to vote. These tactics on the part of the
majority of the board of inspectors of Nabua, very different from those
followed by the board of inspectors of Bato and Iriga, were adopted in
view of the fact that not all the election inspectors of Nabua were
partisans of the protestant, and besides because the protestee knew
that a great majority of the electors of Nabua were partisans of the
protestant.'
"But it appears that this part of the protest was abandoned, as
the parties produced no evidence whatever in support of their
respective allegations. On the other hand, the court considers that if
the facts alleged in the protest are true there is nothing in them that
can in any manner void the election held in the single precinct of
Nabua. The fact of some 80 registered electors having been unable to
vote cannot annul the result of the election in which Crescini obtained
110 votes, and Garchitorena 164. The number of those who were
unable to vote does not even reach 30 per cent of the total number of
electors. The canvass made by the election board should be sustained.
"Municipality of Lagonoy.
"After a perusal of the pleadings of both parties and a careful
examination of the evidence adduced by them, as well in behalf of as
against the protest, I am of the opinion that this elections in this
municipality for the office of governor should be annulled for the
following reasons derived from the following facts, all proven at the
trial, to wit:
"'The municipal council of Lagonoy met several times in order to
proceed to the appointment of election inspectors and a poll clerk, and
did appoint, prior to May 31, 1916, Esteban Mendoza, Balbino
Frondoso, and Doroteo Totailes, as inspectors, and Quintin Bona, as
poll clerk.
"On said date, this court, deciding upon a petition for a writ of
mandamus in which Eulogio Proa was petitioner and the municipal
council of Lagonoy and others were respondents (Civil case No. 2020),
declared to be null and void and of no value the appointment of the
first election inspectors and poll clerk and ordered the issuance of a
peremptory mandamus addressed to the municipal council of Lagonoy
directing that, within 48 hours after it be notified of that mandamus, it
annul said appointment and proceed to appoint other election
inspectors, two of whom should be such persons as the petitioner Proa
might propose. In that civil action of mandamus, the respondents were
jointly the municipal council of Lagonoy, the said inspectors Mendoza,
Frondoso, and Totailes, and the poll clerk Bona.
"As the case was of an urgent nature and there was no time to be
lost, the dispositive part of the decision was telegraphed by the clerk of
the court to the municipal council of Lagonoy through the municipal
president of San Jose. The council was notified and after due summons
met in special session on June 6, 1916, at which session it proceeded
to comply with the order of the court, and Gil Forteza, Gaudencio
Presentacion, and Manuel Ledesma were appointed as election
inspectors, and Ananias Obias, as poll clerk, as substitutes for the
others whose appointment had been annulled by the court. What
happened afterwards, that is, on the day of the elections, is set out in
the minutes made by the election inspectors and poll clerk last
appointed, petitioner's Exhibit J, the tenor of which is literally. as
follows:
"'In the single polling place of the municipality of Lagonoy,
province of Ambos Camarines, P.I., today, the sixth of June, 1916, at
five o'clock in the afternoon, we, the undersigned election inspectors,
hereby solemnly set forth that at 6.30 a.m. of this date we went to the
polling place for the purpose of fulfilling the duties and obligations
imposed upon us by law, as election inspectors legally appointed by
the municipal council at its session held at 9 p.m. of the 5th instant,
but that we were unable to enter the polling place for the reason that
we were stopped and expelled beyond a distance of thirty meters
therefrom by Constabulary guards and the whole municipal police
corps, who would not admit us to the polling place and alleged that in
prohibiting our entrance thereto they were obeying orders given them
by the municipal president and presiding officer of the so styled
election board which, according to said guards, was lawfully
assembled. Therefore, we the undersigned inspectors, for the purpose
of avoiding our being held in any way liable under the law, had to seek
the protection of the municipal president, and, after he had conferred
with the constabulary lieutenant, the fictitious inspectors permitted us,
the undersigned, to enter said polling place, whereupon we took the
required oath and requested of said municipal president that said
intrusive inspectors be expelled and that he obliged them to deliver to
us all the documents, minutes, ballots, and other official papers
concerning the election, but said intrusive inspectors refused to deliver
the same and likewise their possession of the polling place, and
notwithstanding that the municipal president ordered the policemen to
eject them from the polling place, these officers refused to comply with
the municipal president's orders, which refusal was countenanced and
approved by the chief of police who also refused to obey these orders.
"'In view of these facts, we, the undersigned legally appointed
inspectors, had to remain in the polling place and officially confer with
the municipal president to the end that the intrusive inspectors
Esteban Mendoza, Doroteo Totañes, Balbino Frondoso, and the poll
clerk Quintin Bona, might permit compliance and themselves comply
with the orders given by said municipal president, so as not to waste
time in detriment to the holding of the election. But said intruders were
obstinate and refused to permit the election to be held and by such
obstructive acts prevented the fulfillment of the provisions of the
Election Law until the hour of 5 p.m. arrived, at which hour the law
directs that the polls shall be closed, and as a result of said obstruction
the electors who had been waiting since morning were unable to vote
until 5 p.m.
"'Wherefore, we hereby make record of the foregoing facts in
order to avoid the very serious liability which the law might exact of us.
"'In witness whereof we, all the members of the election board,
sign these presents which I, the poll clerk, certify.
"'Signed: Gaudencio Presentacion. — Gil Forteza. — Manuel
Ledesma — Aannias Obias. — Election inspectors and poll clerk. — Ibo
Alvarez. — Elector. — Pedro Demesa. — Elector. — Sofronio Bautista. —
Elector. — Macario Ledesma. Elector.'
"The previous election board composed of the persons whose
appointment was annulled by the court in disobedience to the decision
rendered by the latter and to which no timely and proper exception
was taken, and being in possession of the ballots, documents and other
things necessary for the election, proceeded to hold the same, opening
the polls between 9 and 10 o'clock on the night of June 6th and closing
them at about 5 o'clock on the 7th, with a short recess for rest during
the early morning of the latter date.
"The elections were held in the upper floor of the municipal
building. The voting booths were open and the public was excluded
from the 30 meter limit around the polling place. The inspectors did not
keep a list of the illiterate electors nor take their oaths before they
voted, and they did not permit the electors to deposit their ballots in
the ballot boxes, but the chairman kept them in his pocket or held
them in his hands until the electors went out by his order. After the
election the ballot boxes were not delivered to the municipal secretary,
but instead to the chief of police, the latter being a son of the chairman
of the election board. Several days afterwards, for more or less
justifiable reasons, the municipal secretary was dismissed from office,
the person who was poll clerk was appointed in his stead, and the
latter took possession of the ballot boxes.
"At these elections more than 80 duly qualified and registered
electors were unable to vote or failed to do so either on account of the
considerable delay, or more properly said, of the change in the time for
the opening of the polls, or because they knew that the persons who
were acting as election officers had been shorn of their office by an
order of the court, or perhaps it was because of both of these reasons.
At all events, the courts is of the opinion that if those eighty electors
had voted the result of the elections would necessarily have been
changed in favor of the petitioner and against the respondent.
"The respondent tried to prove as an explanation of the delay or
change in the hour of opening the polls that the herein petitioner
Andres Garchitorena, accompanied by the justice of the peace Ibo
Alvarez and fifty other men, assaulted the polling place, interfered with
the election inspectors, and endeavored to snatch away from them the
ballot boxes, ballots, and other papers pertaining to the board of
inspectors, and were inside the polling place from the time the polls
were opened until 7 o'clock in the evening, the hour when the
inspectors above mentioned were free to hold the election. But the
court holds this allegation to be totally false and wholly disproved by
the testimony of Lieutenant Sablan, a witness in this case who is
exceptionally impartial and truthful.
"The court holds that all the facts above stated were proven and
that they jointly or separately constitute not only a grave illegality but
also a manifest disdain of all the provisions of the Election Law and at
the same time a flagrant contempt against the authority of the court.
These reasons necessarily impose the annulment of the elections held
in this precinct and the court decides that the elections are null and
void.
"Municipality of Sagnay.
"As certified by the provincial board of canvassers, the result of
the provincial election in this municipality is that Manuel Crescini
received 173 votes and Andres Garchitorena 11 only. But as this was
one of the municipalities affected by the protest, the court ordered the
ballot boxes to be brought to it for a revision of the ballots and the
latter were turned over to the commissioners. Besides, oral evidence
was produced in support of the other allegations contained in the
petitioner's protest.
"After closely examining the pleading and evidence of both
parties, the court finds that there are no means available whereby to
determine the number of votes received by each candidate. Therefore
the elections should be annulled on the ground that neither the ballots
found in the ballot boxes nor the election returns prepared by the
board of inspectors can serve as proof.
"The ballots cannot serve as proof because the ballot boxes were
tampered with after the election. This fact was expressly admitted by
both parties and if they had not admitted it, it would have been
evidenced by the following proofs afforded by the report and the
proceedings of the commissioners. The latter in their report stated as
follows:
"PRECINCT OF SAGNAY.
"'It is hereby certified that the ballot boxes of said precinct were
completely covered with thick paper on all their sides except one,
which paper apparently was so placed for the purpose of transmitting
the boxes to the court, for no seal or signature of any inspector
appears thereon. When the inspectors were called before the
commission to identify the ballot boxes, they stated that they could not
do so until said paper covering was removed, and that they did not put
on this covering.
"'The paper covering the sides of the ballot boxes was removed.
"'When the inspectors were again called, they said that the blank
paper that closed the ballot boxes was not in the same condition as
that in which same had been left by them, it appearing that the boxes
were opened and that afterwards a strip of white paper was put on
over the union of the cover and the box proper.
"'The commissioners decided to exhibit the ballot boxes to the
court, and this was immediately done . . .
"' . . . It was discovered that one of these ballot boxes was
entirely empty. In the other ballot box the following documents were
found: Two packages of ballots tied together with dry grass and several
loose ballots. An examination of the latter in the presence of the parties
showed this result:
Loose ballots containing two names only, for the
offices of municipal president and governor 56
Loose ballots marked on their reverse side as extra 2
ballots
ballots
spoiled by the inspectors 1
—
Total 59
"'Then the package tied with dry grass, the covering of which is
marked with the letter A, was opened and was found to contain 51
ballots. "'Afterwards the other package, also tied with dry grass and the
covering of which is marked with the letter B, was opened and was
found to contain 87 ballots.
"'In recapitulation: In this precinct there were found:
ballots
Loose ballots 59
Ballots in the package A 51
Ballots in the package B 87
—
Total 197
"'According to the information given by the provincial treasurer,
290 official blank ballots were transmitted to the municipal treasurer of
Sagnay. There is, therefore, a shortage of 93 ballots.
"'The commission then proceeded to inspect the election returns
furnished by the provincial fiscal. Said returns show that 188 electors
voted; that the number of ballots found in the ballot box was 190; that
there were two ballots marked "Extra Ballots;" that one ballot was
rejected as having been marked; and that there were 42 ballots listed
as marked but not as rejected.
"'According to said returns, the result of the voting for the office
Manuel Crescini 173
Severo Cea l
Sulpicio Cea 1
Honesto Obias 1
—
Total 187
"'The parties then proceeded to separate their respective ballots,
with the following result:
Ballots for Manuel Crescini, not
125
challenged
Ballots for Manuel Crescini, challenged 5
Ballots for Andres Garchitorena, not
6
challenged
Ballots for Andres Garchitorena,
2
challenged
—
Total 138
"Hence it is apparent that the ballot boxes of Sagnay were
tampered With. Forty nine (49) of the used ballots disappeared and no
account was rendered of 93 blank ballots.
"Neither can the election returns serve as proof as they were
falsified, and this falsification was disclosed by the following proven
facts, to wit:
"1. Said returns, which were requested by the office of the
provincial fiscal in order that they might serve as ground for a criminal
action for falsification, bear erasures and alterations in the spaces after
the names of each one of the candidates for the office of
representative, Honesto Obias and Sulpicio Cea, the falsification
consisting in that one of the figures of those that denote the number of
votes obtained by Obias was erased and added to the number of votes
received by the candidate Cea for the purpose of increasing the latter's
votes.
"2. According to these election returns, Andres Garchitorena
received 11 votes. However, 19 witnesses positively testified before
this court that they voted for Garchitorena, and it is not amiss to say in
this connection that the petitioner requested the summoning of 48
witnesses, although but very few of these were able to come to testify.
So that two kinds of evidence prove the falsity of the returns: physical
evidence, that is, the material and visible alteration of the returns and
legal evidence, or that derived from the consideration that there
should be 19 votes for Garchitorena, and not 11 as stated in the
returns, because at least 19 electors swore and testified that they cast
their votes for this candidate. With respect to the first kind of evidence
it does not matter that the material alteration or falsification has
reference, not to the office of governor here under discussion but to
that of representative. According to legal authorities, the general rule
that where it is proven that a witness has voluntarily perjured himself
in an important matter his whole testimony is discredited, is also
applicable to the records made by the inspectors of an election board.
Once such a record is shown to be false in one respect, it should be
considered as false in all its other respects. If we look for a falsity in
direct reference to the office of governor herein under dispute, we shall
find one in the fact that according to the second kind of evidence
above mentioned the number of votes for the candidate Garchitorena
was falsified inasmuch as the returns award him only 11 votes, while it
was proven that at least 19 electors voted for him. "Therefore, the
court holds that as regards the office of governor the elections held in
the municipality of Sagnay are null and void. Municipality of Baao. "At
the elections held in this municipality that of the 419 registered
electors, 254 failed to vote and only 165 voted, with the result that
Manuel Crescini obtained 133 votes and Andres Garchitorena 6 votes.
"Against this result of the elections the petitioner protests and alleges
substantially: 1. Defects of construction and form in the voting booths
of the polling place; 2. That during the voting and the canvass of the
ballots, the election inspectors partisans of the respondent, adopted
procedure violative of law and vexatious to the voters; 3. That the
respondent, in connivance with the provincial governor Fuentebella and
the municipal president Julian Barrameda, conceived and executed the
plan to remove, on the very day of the election, the inspector Paulino
Bernas of the opposite party, in order that all the inspectors might be
of the same party to which the respondent belonged so that by force of
fraud the minority might triumph over the majority; and 4. That in
consequence of the sudden removal and expulsion of the inspector
Paulino Bernas, some 254 electors, a majority of whom were partisan
of the petitioner, saw fit not to vote, and had they voted the result of
the election might have been different.
"The respondent in his answer alleged the following:
"'1. That it is not true that the respondent has. taken part in any
manner, direct or indirect, in the suspensions of the election inspector
Paulino Bernas who is precisely both a personal friend and a political
adherent of the respondent.
"'2. That the differences and questions had in the municipality of
Baao were due to the excitement caused in the designation of the
incumbent for the office of municipal president, that is, they were
merely a matter of local politics, and that the matter of the election of
a provincial governor in no wise concerned those differences and
questions, for in said municipality of Baao nearly all the voters are
partisans of the respondent, and the small remaining minority,
partisans of the candidate Engracio B. Imperial, while the petitioner has
no political influence whatever in this town.
"'3. That although it is true that in this municipality some
electors failed to vote, it was due to their own voluntary desistance or
waiver of their right in consequence of the differences of questions of
local politics that arose in connection with the election for the office of
municipal president; that the inspectors called those electors and
invited them to vote, affording them all necessary opportunities so to
do; and that the respondent himself went to the town of Baao on the
day of the election and begged said electors to vote as they were
nearly all of them his partisans, but they refused to do so, owing to the
aforementioned political questions of a local character.
"'4. That by the failure of said electors to vote no detriment was
caused the petitioner, while the respondent did suffer greatly thereby,
because as aforestated nearly all of said electors were partisans of the
respondent.
"Upon an examination of the evidence adduced by both parties,
in the order of their respective allegations in rebuttal, the court finds
that the preponderance of said evidence establishes the following
facts:
"In the municipality of Baao there were, and are, two opposite
political parties, the respective leaders of which are Julian Barrameda
and Tomas Guevara. About the 7th of March, 1916, that is, at the time
when the municipal council had to proceed to appoint the persons who
were to be election inspectors, Eleuterio Arroyo and Felix Imperial were
known to be candidates for the office of municipal president. The first
of them belonged to the party of the majority and the second to that of
the minority. On said date of March 7th, the municipal council of Baao
appointed as election inspectors Andres Baesa, Ignacio Britanico, and
Paulino Bernas, the two first named belonging to Barrameda's party
and the last named to Guevara's. The council made these
appointments on its own initiative and without any interference
whatever by the local political parties. However, the appointment of
Paulino Bernas as inspector was not due precisely to the council's
respect for or protection to the party of the minority, but principally to
the fact that Paulino Bernas although a partisan of Felix Imperial, a
candidate of the minority, was also a personal enemy of his, there
being reason to believe that on that account Bernas would work
against the candidacy of Felix Imperial, or that at least he would not
accord it very decided support. As Felix Imperial learned of his true
situation in respect to his candidacy, he withdrew the latter, another
reason for his so doing being as the day for the election approached
there came forward out of his political party another candidate named
Domingo Fajardo with greater probabilities of success, because he was
not a personal enemy of the inspector Bernas, addicted to his,
Fajardo's party. But these tactics having come to the observation of
Barrameda's party, its leader conceived the plan not only to remove
Bernas from the board of inspectors, but also to do $o on the very day
of the elections, in order thus to control the situation and render
absolutely futile all attempts of the opposite party opportunely to
obtain any legal redress. Accordingly, on the morning of June 6th,
1916, Paulino Bernas was dismissed from office and forcibly expelled
from the polling place; and Facundo Badong, a municipal policeman
whose resignation as such was still pending action by the municipal
council, was appointed in his stead. If Facundo Badong was not a
partisan of Barrameda's, neither was he a member of the party to
which the expelled inspector belonged. After this incident of the
expulsion which took place in the presence of all the electors belonging
to the same party as did inspector Bernas, and perhaps also in the view
of others who were not of that party, it occurred that 254 electors
abstained from voting and taking part in the elections.
"The evidence does not warrant the conclusion that said 254
electors were prevented from voting by force and intimidation. They
waived their right out of their own free will. Neither does the evidence
support the allegation that the removal of the inspector Bernas was the
result of connivance between Governor Fuentebella, the petitioner
(respondent?), and the municipal president Julian Barrameda. The
political collusions resorted to in the municipality of Baao were of a
purely local nature and in no wise influenced the contest over the
office of provincial governor, and this contest had absolutely nothing
whatever to do with that other one waged over the office of municipal
president of Baao. Fuentebella, Crescini, and Engracio B. Imperial
(another of the candidates for governor) belong to the same political
party. Crescini was a member of the provincial board and so was also
Engracio B. Imperial. According to the evidence, Guevara's party in the
municipality of Baao had no candidate for the office of provincial
governor; some of the members of this party were addicted to Crescini,
others showed greater devotion to Engracio Imperial, while still others
favored the candidacy of the petitioner Andres Garchitorena. So that it
would be a bold and unwarranted assertion to say that Governor
Fuentebella displayed greater active interest for Crescini than for
Engracio Imperial, and no less so to declare that the local party led by
Barrameda gave greater support to the candidacy of Crescini than to
that of Engracio Imperial. And as to the Fajardo's party in the same
locality, it has already been said that it did not have a candidate for the
office of governor. Neither does the evidence support the petitioner's
allegations relative to proceedings violatory of law and vexatious to the
electors.
"With respect to certain irregularities in the mode of conducting
the elections and in the construction or form of the polling place, and
its voting booths, I believe that, even taking them to be true and to
have been proven they cannot vitiate or void the elections held in the
single precinct of Baao in default of proof of fraud. Said elections were
held and conducted by the only electors who wished to exercise their
rights in a regular and orderly manner within the period marked by
law. Despite the incident above mentioned, that of the removal and
expulsion of the inspector Bernas, I am of the opinion that the elections
at Baao should be sustained in order to uphold the will of the 165
electors who went to deposit honorably their votes in the ballot box.
"We now come to the matter of the recount of the votes cast for
the office of provincial governor. It appears that upon the opening of
the ballot boxes, the commissioners found three groups of ballots: the
first was composed of 63 ballots; the second of 15; and the third of 8.
All the ballots in each group were written by the same hand. As several
illiterate electors took part in the election, and as the inspectors were
not called for the purpose of picking out the ballots prepared by them
while assisting said illiterates, the court holds that the ballots of the
group mentioned, i. e., of G3, 15 and 8 ballots found to have been
written by one and the same hand are those which were filled out by
the election inspectors for the incapacitated or disabled voters who
asked their assistance in accordance with the law.
"In fact, from the document Exhibit X of Baao which is the record
of the proceedings had by the board in connection with the assistance
given to illiterates, it appears that 83 electors were assisted by the
inspectors Andres Baesa, Ignacio Britanico, and Facundo Badong in the
proportion of 61, 16, and 6 respectively, which numbers differ very
little from those of the 63, 15 and 8 above referred to.
"The list of illiterate voters attests that 61 ballots were filled in by
Andres Baesa, and the handwriting expert identified sixty seven (four
ballots more) as having been written by the same hand. But after a
careful examination of these four ballots, Nos. 36, 45, 46, and 47, the
court is of the opinion that they are neither identical nor similar to the
rest of the group.
"The petitioner challenged a group of 16 ballots, on the ground
that they were written by the same hand. But it precisely appears in
the list that Ignacio Britanico assisted 16 illiterate electors.
"Facundo Badong prepared 6 ballots for incapacitated voters, and
8 ballots were found written in the same hand writing. The handwriting
expert added one more to the latter number, making this group consist
of 9 such ballots. But it is seen that this additional ballot, bearing No.
33, was erroneously included.
"According to the statements just made, the list should show 63
(64 less 1) electors as assisted by Baesa, 14 (15 less 1), by Britanico,
and 7 (8 less 1) by Badong, that is to say, deducting one ballot from
each group, which is the inspector's own ballot and would not therefore
appear in the list. Now then, adding the said numbers 63, 14, and 7,
we have a total of 84, and comparing this sum with the number 83 in
the list it may be seen that there is only one unit difference, a mistake
that can be easily explained, taking into account this kind of work and
all the circumstances of the case.
"It is easy to understand that the discrepancy between the
proportions accredited to each inspector (63, 14, and 7, and in the list,
61, 16, and 6) is due to involuntary mistakes caused by recording that
Britanico assisted two electors more, while these two were in fact
assisted by Baesa and the other by Badong. In recapitulation, the court
is of the opinion that the list of the illiterate electors notwithstanding
the slight errors mentioned, is correct within the purview of the law;
that it was gotten up honestly by the inspectors and the poll clerk; and
that it is a faithful reflection of the proceedings of the board had in
connection with the matter of assistance given to incapacitated
electors.
"The other ballots challenged are: Nos. 2, 3, 48, 115, and 119, all
for Manuel Crescini and alleged to have been written by the same
hand. They are admitted because in the opinion of the court they were
not all written by the same hand,
"Nos. I21 and 138, the first for Manuel Crescini and the second
for Engracio Imperial. Challenged on the same ground. Admitted. They
are not identical nor alike.
"Nos. 11 and 20, both for Crescini. The same challenge; the same
finding.
"No. 118, for Crescini, and No. 148, for Francisco Botor. It is
alleged that they were written in the same hand. I think not. Admitted.
"Nos. 9 and 10, both for Manuel Crescini. Rejected, because
written in the same handwriting and not by any of the, election
inspectors.
"No. 1, for Manuel Crescini, challenged as having been written
with a drawing pencil. It is admitted, there being no evidence of fraud.
"According to the election returns, Manuel Crescini received 133
votes and Andres Garchitorena 6. But the commissioners awarded no
more than 128 to the first and 5 to the second, and awarded to nobody
the ballots, where the space allotted for the name of the candidate for
the office of governor was left in blank, which ballots were not at all
claimed. The ballots rejected by the inspectors during the canvass and
claimed :before the commission by the parties in interest are again
rejected.
"Consequently, the following final award is made of the votes
cast in the election precinct of Baao, to wit, to Manuel Crescini 128
votes, less two that have been rejected (ballots Nos. 9 and 10), a total
of 126 votes; and to Andres Garchitorena five (5) votes.
"Municipality of Bato.
"Quite extensive are the allegations of the protest against the
returns of the provincial election held in this municipality. They are
recorded in the paragraphs from (a) to (h) of the amended petition of
protest found on pages 82, 83, and 84 of the record, and consist of
violations of law, irregularities of procedure and frauds of so serious a
nature that if true would necessarily invalidate said election.
"The court will not state one by one which allegations are
sustained by the evidence and which are not. For the purposes of this
decision it is sufficient to hold that the following facts were proven:
"1. Three hundred and fifty voters were entered on the election
register and they all voted on the day of the election. The voting lasted
from 7 o'clock in the morning until 10 o'clock at night. When the ballot
boxes were opened, 180 ballots were found to have been prepared and
written by the inspectors while according to the list of illiterates the
number of the latter was only 141. Hence it is concluded that the
inspectors were seriously remiss in the fulfillment of their duty by not
having entered in the list or record of illiterates a considerable number
of electors assisted by them. These inspectors have lost the confidence
reposed in them and cannot excuse themselves by alleging error or
involuntary neglect, because there is too great a difference between
141 and 180; nor can they plead ignorance because if they were
ignorant of the law they would not have prepared the list of illiterates
as the law directs. Therefore, the court holds that the 39 ballots which
make the difference between the 141 electors said to have been
assisted by the inspectors and the 180 electors to be illiterate should
be annulled.
"2. The voting was held not only during the time specified by law,
from 7 o'clock in the morning until sunset, but was also unnecessarily
prolonged four hours more, that is, until 10 o'clock at night. The
number of votes cast during the four hours of unnecessary
prolongation is estimated, according to the evidence, at not less than
92, which is 26 per cent of the total number of electors (350) . Fifteen
hours of voting instead of eleven or twelve as provided by law
represents a very considerable prolongation; and 92, that is 26 per
cent of the electors also represents a no less considerable number. In
other words, the result of the election was in the opinion of the court
affected by the unnecessary promulgation of the voting.
"The authorities on the matter say that when the non-fulfillment
or nonobservance of the provisions of the law with respect to the time
for the opening and closing of the polls is very evident, it should be
considered to have affected the result of the elections which
consequently must be declared null and void.
"Notwithstanding the rule above enunciated, the court would not
annul the entire election, but would accord value to the 92 ballots cast
during the four hours of unnecessary prolongation of the voting,
provided these ballots could be identified either by numbers or by their
contents. But the case is that such identification is impossible, because
the election inspectors, committing with fraudulent intention a new
violation of the law, willfully failed to enumerate successively on the list
each elector who voted. So then, we have the fraud about the
unnecessary prolongation of the voting increased by a new fraud,
which is that of the failure to enumerate, and on the other hand, we
have the effect of both frauds, which had been to cause so much
confusion and obscurity that no means are now available for the
separation of the good votes from the bad ones. The court says that
the intention of the inspectors in committing these frauds was,
fraudulent, because the facts show that such frauds always tend to
increase the votes of one candidate and to reduce those of his
opponent. The 92 votes cast outside of the legal hours should therefore
be annulled, as the 39 votes above referred to were annulled. Thirty
nine and ninety-two makes 131; and deducting 131 from the 180 votes
found for Manuel Crescini, he has left only 49. But, as it cannot be
determined which are these 49 good votes, for, as before explained,
they cannot be separated from the illegal ones, the result is that all
those 180 votes for the candidate just mentioned should be annulled.
"3. After the ballot boxes had been opened, the commissioners
found 30 ballots prepared and written by the inspectors, and all
rejected as having been marked. It is noteworthy that all these ballots
were for the candidate Crescini. No explanation has been made of this
fact, that is, of the existence of these ballots, either in the record of the
proceedings of the election board or in the evidence presented by the
protestee. The court finds no fact, detail, or circumstance whatsoever
that might prove the existence of such ballots so filled in, marked, and
rejected.
"This mystery is explained only by the fact alleged, and which
the court holds to have been proven, that the election inspectors, very
zealous partisans of the respondent, did, during the voting, electioneer
the electors who went to the polls to vote, in order to induce them to
cast their votes for the respondent. These inspectors had in their
possession ballots with the name of Crescini already written on them in
the space allotted for the name of the candidate for the office of
governor; and in the booths they electioneered the voters. If the latter
allowed themselves to be influenced, these prepared ballots were
delivered to them and they filled in the spaces in blank for the names
of the candidates for the other officers; but if they did not allow
themselves to be influenced, then the electors filled in the blank
spaces that were left and afterwards marked the ballots so as to spoil
them. Thus it is understood why all the ballots in question except one
are in the name of Crescini.
"4. The election inspectors falsified the election returns; to be
convinced of this, one has but to note the following details: According
to the returns, the result of the election is that Manuel Crescini
received 292 votes Andres Garchitorena 32, Engracio Imperial 17, and
Severo Cea 1, and there were 10 scattering votes; while, according to
the same returns and the ballots themselves, Manuel Crescini obtained
only 289 votes and Andres Garchitorena 33, not a single vote was
found for either Engracio Imperial or Severo Cea, but there were 20
ballots for various other candidates.
"The evidence brings several other facts to light, but the court
deems it unnecessary to mention them, in view of the conclusions he
has drawn, as seen above. Absolute disdain of the law on the part of
the inspectors with respect to compliance with their duties, as shown
by their failure to record in the returns the true number of electors
assisted by them; unnecessary prolongation of the voting for the sole
purpose of favoring the interests of the respondent; frauds upon frauds
each committed for the purpose of concealing the next preceding one;
appearance of 30 ballots, prepared, challenged, and marked by the
inspectors themselves evidently with the intention to supersede votes
for the petitioner; and falsification of the election returns in the most
inconsiderate and unwarranted manner — each one of these reasons,
and all of them jointly, necessarily determine the annulment of the
election.
"Therefore the court annuls the elections held in the municipality
of Bato for the selection of an incumbent for the office of governor.
"Municipality of Buhi.
"Of the irregularities, illegalities, and frauds alleged in the motion
of protest against the returns of the election held in the municipality,
the court finds the following ones to have been proven:
"(a) The election inspectors Gregorio Ricafranca, Jose Crescini,

and Dalmacio Amador are all zealous partisans of the protestee, and
the second named, Jose Crescini, is' his uncle.
"(b) According to the provincial board of canvassers, Manuel
Crescini received 280 votes, and Andres Garchitorena 39.
"(c) All the inspectors above mentioned did electioneering and
propaganda work, on a greater or less scale and with greater or lesser
activity, in behalf of the protestee, not only inside but also outside of
the polling place, and both before and during the election.
"(d) The inspector Jose Crescini, availing himself of his office,
made Use of censurable means in order that illiterate electors, while
filling out their ballots, might vote for the herein respondent who is a
nephew of said inspector. Exhibit A is a ballot that was crumpled by the
elector Lorenzo Peñacerrada, because, while he was filling it in inside
the booth, the inspector Jose Crescini entered there and, seeing that
this elector was voting for another candidate, made the threat to him
that he, Grescini, would spoil the ballot unless the elector voted for the
herein respondent, and then Peñacerrada, in despair, crumpled his
ballot, thus spoiling it. Exhibits B and C are both ballots by Santiago
Fabricante, for the first one was spoiled by Jose Crescini by erasing or
trying to erase the name of Engracio Imperial, a candidate for the office
of governor, whereupon Crescini handed Fabricante a second ballot
which was filled out by Crescini as regards the office of governor, and
was then handed over to the elector Fabricante so that he might
complete it by writing in the names of the candidates he chose for the
other offices. Exhibit E is a ballot by Balbino San Luis. It is torn on its
upper margin because Jose Crescini tried to take the ballot away from
the elector in order to see its contents which act was resisted by the
latter. Exhibits F and G are the two ballots which the elector Felix
Estanislao had, for, after duly filling in the first one and while he was
putting it into the ballot box, the inspector Crescini obliged him to show
it to him, and, seeing that Estanislao had not voted for Manuel Crescini
for governor, had the ballot changed for another one, and spoiled the
first ballot by the superposition of other letters or names in connection
with all the offices from that of municipal president to that of the last
councilor.
"(e) While Jose Crescini was performing the acts related in the
preceding paragraph, the other inspectors did nothing to curb him or
prevent him from so doing but, on the contrary, each of them did all he
could to cooperate with Crescini. Nazario Saballa, an elector 54 years
of age, testified that Gregorio Ricafranca assisted him in the
preparation of his ballots, and that he was not asked as to whom he
intended to vote for, though his candidate for governor was Andres
Garchitorena. Notwithstanding, Ricafranca filled out and prepared
Saballa's ballot. The evidence shows moreover that of the 34 or more
ballots written by this inspector Ricafranca none are for the petitioner
Andres Garchitorena; all of them are for the respondent Manuel
Crescini. As regards the other inspector Dalmacio Amador, we have the
testimony of five witnesses who positively stated that they were
assisted by him in the preparation of their ballots, and that they told
him that they desired to vote for Andres Garchitorena for governor.
However, of the ballots written by Amador only three were found to be
for the petitioner.
"(f) Said inspectors, with the deliberate intention of increasing
the number of votes for Crescini and decreasing those for Andres
Garchitorena, falsified the returns by recording therein the following
result: That Manuel Crescini received 280 votes, Andres Garchitorena
39, Engracio Imperial 17, and the other candidates 6, when in fact and
in truth, as they themselves very well knew, Manuel Crescini obtained
only 270 votes, Andres Garchitorena 51, and the other candidates 25.
"(g) Of the 350 electors who voted, about 97 were illiterates and
therefore were assisted in the preparation of their ballots by the
inspectors. However, the commissioners found in the ballot box 106
ballots written by the inspectors.
"(h) Said 97 illiterate electors did not take oath of their incapacity
before voting, and the Exhibit 1 or list of illiterates is false. Twenty two
of these illiterates electors testified before this court that they did not
take oath before they voted. On the other hand, see in the
stenographic notes the testimony given by the handwriting expert with
respect to the list Exhibit 1.
"The foregoing acts which, as it is seen, constitute enormous
frauds and irregularities of a most impudent nature, more than
sufficiently warrant the annulment of the elections heldin this
municipality; but, mindful that the influence of such frauds has not
been far reaching and that means are still to distinguish the good votes
from the corrupted ones, the court now proceeds to make the following
canvass of the votes.
"Of the 280 votes for the respondent Manuel Crescini, there
should be annulled and deducted 32 ballots prepared for illiterate
voters by the inspector Dalmacio Amador, 28 ballots prepared for
illiterates by the inspector Ricafranca, and 44 ballots prepared for
illiterates by the other inspector Jose Crescini, aggregating a total of
104 ballots prepared or votes by illiterates; this annulment and
rejection is made because these electors did not take the oath of
incapacity before voting. Besides, the following ballot s should be
annulled and deducted; 6 ballots, Nos. 185, 195, 198, 199, and 294,
and the Exhibit C, for the reason that the space intended for the name
of the candidate for the office of governor was filled in by Jose Crescini,
and the rest of the space for the names of the candidate for the other
offices by the respective electors; one ballot, No. 117, because it bears
Crescini's name in two spaces; one ballot, No. 241, because by it
Manuel Cresini's not voted for governor; one ballot, No. 246 because
the space for the name of the candidate for governor is blank; one
ballot, No. 247,because it bears only the letters M. C., the initials of
Manuel Crescini'sname; 2 ballots, Nos. 255 and 322, because by them
Manuel Crescini is not voted for governor; one ballot, No. 251, because
it is marked.All the other challenged ballots are admitted.
Consequently, Manuel is finally awarded 149 of the votes cast in this
precinct.
"To the 51 votes received by Andres Garchitorena one other,
ballot no. 321, is tobe added as this ballot contains no defect whatever;
but there are to be deducted and annulled two votes by illiterates
assisted by the inspector Amador, because these electors did not take
oath of their incapacity. The petitioner, Andres Garchitorena, is finally
awarded 50 of the votes cast in this municipality.
"Municipality of Calabanga.
"The following facts at least are disclosed by the abundant
evidence produced by the petitioner in support of the averments of his
protest against the returns of the provincial election held in this
municipality:
"(a) The election inspectors Toribio Felipe, Roman Malanyaon,
and Manuel Sabido were all faithful partisans of the respondent
Crescini and worked actively in behalf of his candidacy and against
Garchitorena's, not only prior to the election but also during the same
and during the voting inside the polling place itself.
"(b) From the election register it appears that 368 voters were
registered, of which 348 voted and 20 did not, according to the
enumeration of the ballots cast. However, in the returns by the
inspectors above mentioned, the latter attest that 340 electors voted,
and that the number of ballots found by them in the ballot box was also
340. The committee of revision found that there were 349 spoiled
ballots, 15 of which had been rejected by the inspectors during the
canvass, and that there were 19 ballots spoiled during the voting, and
80 blank official ballots left over, making a total, altogether, of 448
ballots. On the other hand, said inspectors stated in their respective
testimony that 250 electors voted.
"(c) Said inspectors identified 107 ballots as written by them in
their assistance to illiterate electors, 80 of these ballots being for the
candidate Crescini, and 20 for the candidate Garchitorena; but they
made no list of the illiterates, do not know the names of these, nor
even their numbers, and did not have these supposed illiterates take
the oath of incapacity before voting.
"It is alleged that the failure to make the list of illiterates was due
to neglect committed in good faith. But the court is compelled to
disattend such a plea. Public officials like these inspectors who, as we
have just seen, performed the acts mentioned in the last two preceding
paragraphs merit no credence and lose all of the confidence the law
reposed in them by reason of their office. They also aver that although
they did not make any list of illiterates containing an attestation that
the latter took the oath, the truth is that such illiterates did take the
oath of incapacity before voting. The court however considers this plea
to be invalid like the preceding one, not only for the reasons already
stated but also because 20 illiterate witnesses testified that they did
not take the oath of incapacity before they voted, and chiefly because
the poll clerk of the election board testified under oath, at the hearing
on the municipal protest on the elections of Capalonga, that the board
of inspectors did not take the oath of the illiterate electors. It is fitting
to remind the parties that there is on file in the record an agreement
according to which all evidence produced in regard to the municipal
protest should be taken into account in connection with the provincial
protest.
"The court is of the opinion that there is no need of any
pronouncement as to whether the evidence does or does not support
the allegations of the protest with reference to the direct or indirect
intervention of Governor Fuentebella in the fight over the appointment
of election inspectors for Capalonga; whether on the day of the
elections said governor did or did not unduly influence the electors by
means of force or threats before they entered within the area of the
polling place; whether the voting booths of said polling place were or
were not perfectly made; whether there was at first a guard rail but
which, the day before the election, was ordered removed; whether, for
many days prior to the election, the official ballots were in the
possession of the board of inspectors, so that the latter, the night
before the election, could have prepared said ballots by writing the
name of Crescini in the space allotted for the office of governor; and
whether, on the day of the election, they delivered the ballots so
prepared to the electors who were going to vote. Some of these
allegations are proven, while others lack conclusive proof. What seems
to be the surest and most important way for the court to decide upon
the protest made with respect to this municipality, is to rely solely and
exclusively on the facts held in the beginning to have been proven and
on the canvass of the ballots themselves, ever keeping in mind the rule
staunchly recommended by legal authorities, that use should not be
made of the power to annul all the votes cast in a precinct, except in
extreme cases and where there are no means of ascertaining the true
will of the majority, freely and honestly manifested in the ballots.
"The result given by the latter is as follows: For Manuel Crescini
133, and for Andres Garchitorena 82.
"Several of these ballots were challenged by the protestant on
the grounds he alleged before the commission. The court will now
proceed to make the canvass and decide upon these impeachments.
"104 of the 107 ballots written by the inspectors are rejected
because they were written for persons who are unknown and who did
not take oath of their incapacity. 87 of these ballots were cast for
Crescini and 20 for Garchitorena. 3 of the 107 ballots are admitted as
votes for the candidate Crescini, because they were cast by the three
inspectors in their own behalf.'
"Nine votes, 3 of them for Crescini and 6 for Garchitorena, which
are ballots Nos. 7, 8, 50, 64, 66, 175, 209, 229, and 331,, were
challenged as having been written by the same hand. The court is of
the opinion that they were not and admits them, that is, 8 of them for
Crescini and 6 for Garchitorena. "One vote, ballot No. 266, challenged
as ambiguous because the name of Crescini is written on it twice, is
rejected.
"One vote, ballot No. 297, for Crescini, challenged as being
illegible, is rejected.
"Five votes, ballots Nos. 230, 238, 244, 304, and 310, are
challenged because they bear the name of Crescini outside of the
space allotted for the office of governor.
"Upon an examination of these five ballots, the court admits as
votes for Crescini, the ballots Nos. 230, 238J and 244, but rejects the
other two, Nos. 304 and 310. So that in conclusion, of the 133 votes for
Crescini, 88 should be deducted, to wit: 84 votes by illiterates, one
illegible vote, one ambiguous vote, and 2 votes with the name of the
candidate written outside of the proper space, the remainder, 45 votes,
being counted in his favor; and of the 82 votes for Andres
Garchitorena, the 20 votes cast by illiterates should be deducted, and
he is awarded the remainder, or 62 votes.
"Municipality of Iriga.
"Three polling places were provided for this municipality on
account of its large population; and after an examination of the
evidence submitted with respect to the elections had in the first
precinct, the court has come to the conclusion that said elections
should be completely annulled on the grounds, first, that the ballot
boxes were tampered with, and, second, that the returns were falsified.
The tampering with the ballots boxes is proved (a) by the testimony of
the chairman and poll clerk of the election board, and (b) by the
physical appearance of the ballot boxes them selves according to the
commissioner's report, an excerpt from which is as follows:
"'ENRIQUE ITURRIOS, presiding officer of the first polling place,
examined the box of the good ballots of the first polling place and
testified that said ballot box had been changed; that the sides of the
ballot box that had been used on the day of the election were of one
single piece, while the sides of the present ballot box are of two pieces;
that the wood of the ballot box used was newer than that of the
present box; that the box of good ballots brought to this commission is
not the same one that was delivered to the municipal secretary after
the election; that the papers containing the signature of the municipal
secretary. which were stuck to the edges of the ballot box after the
election, were no longer there, and that after the election the ballot
boxes were not closed with a key but with nails. He identified the
signature that appears on the strip of paper attached to the lid and
extending across the front side of the box, and testified that said paper
is the same one which they (the inspectors) signed and stuck on the
original box in the same manner.'
The minutes also contain a record of the description of the ballot
boxes, as follows:
"'With respect to the conditions of the ballot boxes before they
were opened by this commission, it is made a matter of record, that
the box of good ballots is square on all its sides, is made of packing-
case boards that are quite thick and of a natural color, is similar to the
other ballot boxes of the same municipality of Iriga, and is securely
nailed. On the cover there is a paper of the size of legal cap which
extends to the middle of the front side of the box, and on the edges of
this paper there are several daubs of sealing wax which serve as seals.
Said paper bears the following words: "1.er Colegio electoral" (1.st
Polling Place) and the signature of Enrique Iturrios and Francisco
Hernandez, and below, "Junio 6, 1916." On the ballot box of the good
ballots there are also several small strips of paper stuck to the sides,
corners, and edges and bearing the following inscription: "Julio 13,
1916.— PastorS. Guadalupe Municipal Secretary." In the bottom of the
ballot box of good ballots of the first precinct there is an opening near
one corner, two and a half inches long by one inch wide. This opening
does not appear to have been made by outside force nor by any
instrument whatever, but is a natural break in the wood caused by a
knot.
"'The ballot box of spoiled ballots is of the same shape and size
as that of the good ballots, except that it is a trifle higher than the
latter, due to the cover being of thicker lumber.
"'On the cover of this box there is likewise a long sheet of legal
cap paper reaching to the middle of the front side. and on the edges of
this paper there are also daubs of sealing-wax and the following word:
"1.er Colegio Electoral.— Balotas inutilizadas, Junio 6, 1916." (First
Polling place.— Spoiled ballots, June 6, 1916. ) Said ballots box has also
several papers stuck to the edges bearing the words: "Julio 13, 1916.—
Pastor S. Guadalupe Mun. Sec."'
"During the hearing on this incidental question, Enrique Iturrios
testified substantially as follows: That he is the chairman of the election
board of the first precinct; that the ballot box used at the election
intended for good ballots was sealed with paper signed by the three
inspectors (the witness, Francisco Hernandez, and Paulino Federis) and
was delivered to the municipal secretary together with the box of the
spoiled ballots (the paper seal of which box appears not to have been
signed by any inspector); that one Sunday night subsequent to the
election, after prior notice by the protestee Manuel Crescini, witness
went with the latter to the municipal building from which they took the
ballot boxes of the first precinct and carried them in a sack to the
protestee's house, and as soon as they entered it Crescini sent for the
other inspector, Hernandez, who arrived immediately and thereupon
broke the cover of the ballot box of good ballot and opened without
breaking the cover of the box of spoiled ballots; that after both
receptacles had thus been opened, he (Iturrios) and Hernandez
engaged themselves in restoring several spoiled ballots which bore the
name of Manuel Crescini for governor, transferring them to the ballot
box of good ballots, and from the latter removed ballots that had been
cast for Andres Garchitorena and for other candidates, and put them
into the box of spoiled ballots; that they also erased the name of
Andres Garchitorena from other ballots, writing afterwards in place
thereof the name of Manuel Crescini; and that the ballot box for good
ballots used at the election was destroyed by fire and was substituted
by a similar box which Crescini had there in his house, in which latter
box the good ballots and those corrected were placed, and after this
had been done the lid was nailed down and was sealed With another
sheet of paper like the one used on the destroyed box, but signed by
only the two inspectors Iturrios and Hernandez, the sole persons who
were present during those proceedings.
"Francisco Velasco, poll clerk of this same polling place, testified
that the ballot box exhibited to him as the one used at the election
held in the first precinct of Iriga, was not the one there used, because
the ballot box that they used did not have a large opening at the
bottom; that the sides of the genuine box were each made of one
single piece of lumber and not of several; and that the paper
containing the seals was signed by the three inspectors, and not by
only two of them.
"In one of the ballot boxes there were found 420 good ballots and
3 which are claimed, and in the other box, 47 spoiled ballots with the
word 'spoiled' also written on their reverse, on some of them with an
indelible pencil and on the others with a pen. Of the 420 good ballots,
400 are for Manuel Crescini, 14 for Engracio Imperial, 4 for Andres
Garchitorena, 1 is illegible, and 1 undecipherable. The 47 spoiled
ballots can be classified as follows: 13 for Crescini, 16 for Imperial, 8 for
Garchitorena, 3 for Botor, and 7 for various other candidates.
"Twenty two of said 420 good ballots originally bore on their
reverse side the word 'spoiled' which was erased in order to restore
them: besides, something is noticed in these ballots that distinguishes
them from the other good ones, but which, at the same time, makes
them similar to the spoiled ballots, and it is that the good ballots
(except 2 of them which perhaps through confusion were included) all
have, in about the central and middle part of their upper half, a small
hole produced by a pin, needle, or thread, which indicates that they
were strung together. The same kind of hole is also noticed in 24 of the
47 spoiled ballots, while these 22 ballots just above mentioned, as well
as the other 23 (of the 47) spoiled ballots, have no such hole. These
details show indubitably that the 24 perforated ballots now found
among the spoiled ones were once among the good allots and were
strung with them by means of the same needle or the same thread,
and that the 22 ballots which the word 'spoiled' erased, or, better said,
restored ballots, must have come from the lot of spoiled ballots with
which they must previously have been joined without stringing of any
kind.
"The respondent's attorneys themselves in their brief admit that
the ballot boxes were tampered with, and therefore it is unnecessary to
dwell further on this matter.
"The election returns were falsified. The proof are: (1) the
notable discrepancy between the canvass of the votes and the returns.
According to the canvass there were 406 votes for Crescini, while the
returns show that there were 400, but it is to be noted that this
number '400' was written above the number '406' which was erased;
(2) this discrepancy is still greater, as well with reference to the other
offices as to the names of the candidates voted for, Cea, Ortiz, and
Nery; and (3) the recitals of the returns are in agreement with the
contents of the ballot boxes after these had been tampered with. Said
discrepancy plainly shows that after tampering with the ballot boxes it
was found necessary to amend and falsify the returns so as to make
them agree with the ballots.
"With the violation of the ballot boxes and the falsification of the
election returns, the annulment of the election would be perfectly
warranted; but the evidence discloses further reasons, to wit,
deficiency in the construction of the voting booths of the polling place,
in such way that the secrecy of the ballot was not safeguarded, and
bad conduct on the part of the inspectors, by their exerting, undue and
improper influence on the electors in the polling place in the booths,
and they did not only do this, but they also deprived and defrauded
them of their votes. A mere deficiency of construction in a polling place
is generally not such an irregularity as would invalidate an entire
election; but when the deficiency or irregularity was purposely caused
with the deliberate intent to commit frauds, as in fact were committed,
I believe that they vitiate the whole election. The same may be said of
the conduct of the inspectors who, we would remark incidentally, were
all partisans of the respondent Manuel Crescini.
"Therefore, the elections held in the first precinct of Iriga for the
selection of an incumbent for the office of governor, is annulled.
"SECOND PRECINCT (IRIGA).
"1. The evidence shows that the following irregularities, frauds,
and illegalities were committed at the elections held in the second
precinct: 284 good ballots and 25 spoiled ones were found in the ballot
boxes: 184 of these ballots were prepared and written for illiterates by
the three inspectors, Juan Castro, Bembenuto Bersamina, and Juan
Salvador in the proportion respectively of 70, 28, and 82. It is to be
taken into account that said number includes not only the ballots
identified by the inspectors and which they frankly and expressly
admitted that they had written, but also the ballots which were
discovered by the handwriting expert, with whose opinion in regard
thereto the court agrees. All these 184 ballots are for the protestee
Manuel Crescini. There is not a single vote by any illiterate for the
protestant, nor for any candidate opposing him. 20 of the ballots filled
in by the inspector Juan Salvador were found to be perfectly smooth,
with no sign whatever of their ever having been folded. Before all and
above all it appears that these three inspectors were partisans of
Crescini, and that the latter himself recommended their appointment to
the municipal council.
"2. In the election returns (Exhibit G-Iriga) the statements,
among others, are made that the polls were opened at 7 o'clock in the
morning and remained open continuously until 8 o'clock in the
evening; that according to the registry list the number of persons who
voted was 285; and that the number of ballots found in the ballot box
was 285. In the same returns however said inspectors also state that
the canvass of the ballots showed the following result with respect to
the office of governor: Manuel Crescini, 276 votes; Engracio Imperial,
6; Andres Garchitorena, 1; Fulgencio Contreras, 1; Severo Cea, 1;
Felipe Mamponbanua, 1; and Francisco Botor, 1. The votes so
distributed make a total of 287; consequently in that election there
were two votes more than the number of electors. The inspectors did
not record the truth, and therefore were seriously remiss in the
fulfillment of their official oath.
"3. The list of illiterate voters, presented in evidence by the
respondent as Exhibit 5-A-Iriga, contains the names of 167 persons
who, it is alleged, 'requested to be assisted by the inspectors, on
account of their being incapacitated, and subscribed their oaths of
incapacity.' Said list shows that the inspector Juan Castro assisted 65
electors, Bembenuto Bersamina 35, and Juan Salvador 66; a total of
166 incapacitated electors. So that one more person voted and it is not
known who assisted him.
"4. Said inspectors permitted 21 electors to vote whose names
had been stricken from the election register, and did so knowing that
these electors were disqualified. These facts appear from said register
which shows the registration of 52 electors, opposite whose names the
following note was written by the inspectors: 'Excluded through
challenge by the municipal treasurer, 21 of whom voted and 31 did
not.'
"5. Eleven witnesses for the petitioner testified that they voted
for this candidate; however, only one single ballot for him was found, or
five ballots, if we add to the first the four found among the spoiled
ballots, for, on the other hand, these four are good ballots and should
be counted. Hence it is concluded that the inspectors not only falsified
the register, the election returns, and the list of illiterate voters, but
also deprived and defrauded the petitioner of votes, and awarded them
to the respondent.
"6. Three witnesses for the petitioner testified that the secrecy of
their ballots was violated by the inspectors within the booths; and 5
witnesses also testified that they were going to cast their votes for
Garchitorena, but were unduly and improperly influenced by the
inspectors and therefore voted for Manuel Crescini.
"7. The preponderance of the evidence shows that the illiterate
voters did not take the oath of incapacity before voting.
"If the illegalities above mentioned were the result of only
excusable neglect, error, or ignorance on the part of the inspectors,
undoubtedly they would not vitiate the election; but the court holds
that they were all fraudulent and served as means for the commission
of frauds, such as in fact were committed, and consequently further
holds that in the instant case they necessarily determine the nullity of
the election.
"The petitioner insists on the correctness of the list of illiterates,
Exhibit 5-A Iriga. The court however is obliged to reject this exhibit, not
only for the reasons above mentioned but also because of the
following: Immediately after the filing of the motion containing the
protest, the court ordered the municipal secretary to bring in all the
ballots boxes and all the documents used in the election, but that
official did not forward the exhibit in question. This exhibit was
presented here in court by the respondent only during the hearing.
Besides, according to the inspector Juan Castro, the exhibit in question
or list of illiterates was made on the very day of the elections, and the
names there in recorded were put down more or less in the same order
as these electors voted. However, such relationship of order was not
kept With respect to several names, particularly the last ones.
"Supposing for a moment the contrary to be true, namely, that
there were no frauds but mere irregularities in the election here in
question, then the canvass of the votes should be made in the
following manner:
"According to the returns, Crescini received 276 votes, and
Garchitorena only one. From the 276 votes for Crescini we would
deduct the following, as being null and void: 181 votes by illiterates
because they did not take the oath of incapacity and because no list of
such illiterates was made; 21 votes by electors who voted in spite of
their exclusion from the list; 43 votes which were deposited in the
ballot box by electors outside of the regular hours for voting; 3 votes,
because the secrecy of the ballots was violated; 5 votes obtained
through electioneering by the inspectors; and 6 votes of which
Garchitorena was deprived and defrauded by the latter, making a total
of 259 votes that are null and void. According to this count, Crescini
would have left 17 votes as against one for Garchitorena; but, as the
number of votes cast at the election amounts to 285, were we to give
validity to these 17 votes for Crescini, he would be elected, not by the
people as a whole nor by a majority of the voters, but by an
insignificant fraction of the minority, which could not be allowed.
Whatever be the angle of view, all consideration converges in the
necessity of the annulment of the elections.
"Consequently the court holds that the elections had in the
second precinct of Iriga for the selection of an incumbent for the office
of governor are null and void.
"THIRD PRECINCT (IRIGA).
"The elections held in this precinct should be annulled, just as
have been those held in the first and second precincts, because of their
being tainted with the following frauds and illegalities proven at the
trial:
"1. Two hundred and fifty-nine good ballots were found in the
ballot boxes. Of these, the inspectors Ciriaco Alfelor, Pablo Aguilar, and
Manuel Ceguera identified 116 in the following proportion: by Alfelor
56; by Aguilar 30; and by Ceguera 30, making a total of 116 ballots by
assisted illiterates. However, according to the list formed by the
inspectors and presented in evidence by the protestee, the number of
illiterate reaches only 95. So then, as there are 21 extra ballots, the
election inspectors either formed a false list of illiterates or they
assisted 21 electors who, could read and write. Here begins the series
of frauds. This list of illiterates is not admissible as proof of anything
but the illegality and fraud committed by the election inspectors.
"2. The list Exhibit 4 Iriga presented by the respondent bears the
following heading: 'List of the qualified electors who voted in the third
precinct, and shows in their proper numeration the following names
among others, to wit: Juan Beroga 35, Marcos de los Reyes 156, Tomas
Oliva 198, Agaton Oliva 199, Marcos de los Reyes 209, Tomas Oliva
199, Agaton Oliva 199, Marcelo Tabayug 209, and Tomas Gonzalez
226. However, the registration lists disclose that Juan Beroga did not
vote, and that Marcos de los Reyes, Tomas Oliva, Agaton Oliva, and
Tomas Gonzalez were not registered in the third precinct, but in the
second where they also did not vote. Marcelo Tabayug's name is not
found on any of the registration lists of Iriga that is to say, he was not
an elector. How stupendous the frauds just mentioned ! How could four
electors registered in the second precincts have voted in the third
precinct? And how could one Marcelo Tabayug have voted in the third
precinct, when his name does not appear on any of the registration lists
of Iriga? Frauds upon frauds.
"3. Besides the 259 good ballots found in the ballot box,. there
were also found two groups of spoiled ballots, the first composed of 13
ballots bearing on their reverse side the word 'spoiled' and the second
of 15 ballots without this word. However, the registration list shows
that 282 electors were registered in the third precinct, of whom 254
voted and 28 did not, and that only 13 ballots were spoiled during the
voting. Hence it is concluded that there, were 5 good ballots left over,
and that there were besides 15 good surplus ballots Which were placed
among the spoiled ones. What opprobious name should be deservingly
given to such frauds? The inspectors of the third precinct of Iriga,
rather than inspectors, appear to have been magicians or sleight-of-
hand artists who perform marvelous tricks by using ballot boxes
instead of juggler's goblets.
"4. The voting was unduly prolonged until 7 o'clock in the
evening of the day of the election, notwithstanding that only 282
electors had registered and only 254 of them voted.
"5. The aforementioned inspectors allowed several electors to
vote whose names appear on the register with the following
memorandum written after them by these same inspectors: 'Excluded
through challenge by the municipal treasurer.' Of the 51 electors so
exclude 32 voted.
"The court holds that generally the same irregularities and
illegalities were proven to have been committed in this precinct as in
the second precinct, to wit, violation of the law in reference to the
location of the polling places, the three stations being very near each
other and all three of them in close vicinity to the respondent, to the
conditions of the ballot boxes and voting booths; defraudation of votes;
violation of the secrecy of the ballots; and electioneering within the
polling place and the booths.
"In regard to the elections held in this precinct, no other
pronouncement can be made than to declare, as the court does,
hereby declare, that said elections are null and void and should be
rejected.
"According to the returns of the provincial board of canvassers,
which accompany the motion of protest, the total number of votes cast
in the whole province for the office of provincial governor is 8,312,
distributed among the following candidates voted for: Manuel Crescini
3,198; Andres Garchitorena 2,468; Engracio Imperial 1,954; and
Francisco Botor 692; that is according to the canvass made by the
provincial board, the respondent Manuel Crescini has over the
petitioner Andres Garchitorena a majority of 730 votes. But this count
must be amended to make it conformable to the pronouncements of
this decision with respect to the eleven municipalities affected by the
protest. In other words, the count should be made in the following
manner:
Crescini Garchitorena
Crescini Garchitorena Baao 126 5

Bato 0 0
Buhi 149 50
Calabanga 45 62
Capalonga 6 11
Iriga, first precinct 0 0
Iriga, second precinct 0 0
Iriga, third precinct 0 0
Lagonoy 0 0
Mambulao 2 82
Minalabac 0 0
Nabua 110 164
Sagnay 0 0
making a total of 438 votes for the respondent Crescini and 374 for the
petitioner Garchitorena. Adding the 438 votes obtained by Crescini in
the eleven protested municipalities to the 1,003 votes obtained by him
in the remaining municipalities of the province, and performing the
same operation with respect to the votes cast for Garchitorena in the
municipalities, whether or not the returns from these were the subject
of the protest, we shall have the following final result: In the provincial
elections Manuel Crescini obtained as a candidate for the office of
governor of Ambos Camarines 1,441 votes, and Andres Garchitorena
2,387. Now comparing these total sums, there results a difference of
946, which represents the majority of votes obtained by Andres
Garchitorena over Manuel Crescini.
"By reason of all the foregoing, the protest is sustained and it is
held that the petitioner Andres Garchitorena was elected provincial
governor of Ambos Camarines with a majority of 946 votes over the
respondent. Therefore it is ordered that a writ of mandamus issue
against the provincial board of canvassers directing it to amend its
returns so as to make them conform to the findings of this decision.
"So ordered with costs against the respondent.
"Albay (for Naga, Ambos Camarines), August 22, 1918.
"ISIDRO PAREDES,
"Judge, 15th Judicial District."

Garchitorena - v. - Crescini20210424-12-1kx78l5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Garchitorena - v. - Crescini20210424-12-1kx78l5

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Garchitorena - v. - Crescini20210424-12-1kx78l5

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

EN BANC

[G.R. No. 14514. December 18, 1918.]

ANDRES GARCHITORENA, petitioner-appellant , vs. MANUEL

1. ELECTIONS; WHEN THE ENTIRE ELECTION SHOULD BE NULLIFIED. —

This is an appeal from a decision of the Court of First Instance of the

Total vote as result of this

NOTE.— Abbreviations used.

Prov. B. Insp.= Provincial board of Inspector.

The carefully prepared opinions of Judges Mina and Paredes present

"By a mere glance at the preceding table, whether we take the

According to the recount and the ballots

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

153. Policarpo Salvadora 174

"Therefore, the elections held in the single precinct of Sagnay, on

1. Baao 126 5 7 --------

"(a) The election inspectors Gregorio Ricafranca, Jose Crescini,

Crescini Garchitorena Baao 126 5

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

You might also like

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.