The defendants appeal from the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Leyte convicting them of robbery with homicide and sentencing them to life imprisonment with the accessory penalties, jointly and severally, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased, Go Bongco, in the sum of P1,000, and to pay the  costs; they contend that  the court erred in holding that they have committed the crime of robbery and finding them guilty of said crime with homicide, instead of finding only Apolonio Dumduma guilty,  and only of homicide, acquitting Candido Caindoy.

In our opinion, it  has been fully proven that on  the occasion in question,  robbery  was committed and in  connection therewith Go Bongco was  assaulted  and  killed. The latter, according to  the  testimony  of his  wife (page 8, t. s. n.), had  P22 with him when he left his home on the morning of the crime; he reached the town of La Paz where he  cured Chua Siaco, who paid him P18 (page 52, id.). On his way back, Gui Uy Co saw  him in "his shop that night exchanging the loose change he had amounting to P10 for paper  money and placing it with  other bills which he carried.  A few moments later, about  7.30 that evening, the victim got into Yu Piaco's motor car which was going his way, arriving at  the barrio of Guinarona half an hour later, or about  8  o'clock, walking the rest of the distance to his home in the municipality of Dagami; that nearly an hour later when the defendants attacked him, he exclaimed: "Wah-pay-ah! Apolonio take my money if you want, but don't kill  me, for we are fellow-countrymen!" (Page 32, t. s. n.)  It follows,  by an inference sufficient in law,  that when the deceased was attacked by the accused, he  carried money with him, which in the absence of evidence to the contrary, must be presumed to be the said amount of P40 consisting of  the P22 he had  with him when he left his home and the P18 given him in La Paz by Chua Siaco.

That the money which the deceased had at the beginning of the assault, and which in view of the blows he received he was willing to turn over to his assailants had disappeared when the body was being removed, although strewn about were a handkerchief, buttons torn from his shirt, and other articles.

The clear and unavoidable  conclusion from these facts is that the accused took the money, which was the motive of the homicide.

With regard to the part which appellant Candido Caindoy took in the crime,  the record shows that:

A few moments before the incident while Yu Piao was talking with the deceased, he  saw two persons passing in front  of his  shop going towards Dagami,  both  wearing black trousers,  one of  them with a white  shirt and the other with a white undershirt, one with a cap and the other with a pandan hat.

A few  moments later witness Pedro  Balatar saw and recognized the defendants walking in front of him, and about  five  arm's lengths  from another person, whom he did not at the time recognize.

During the  assault, Cornelio Balatar, who witnessed it, recognized defendant  Apolonio Dumduma wearing a  cap, short sleeves and black trousers, and saw but did not recognize his companion, who wore a pandan hat and a shirt with short sleeves.  Examining the testimony  of this  witness given at  the hearing, in connection  with his  affidavit Exhibit 1, we  conclude that although he saw the appellant Candido Caindoy on  that occasion, he  did  not recognize him.

Ramon Maray also  testifies that he saw two assailants on the  occasion,  even though he did not recognize Candido Caindoy, and  he affirms that one of them wore a pandan hat, undershirt, and black trousers, and that Candido Caindoy who was  pointed out to him at the trial, was one of the two he saw that night.

And Mateo Amado testifies that at about 9 o'clock in the morning of June 2, 1930, which was the day after the night in question, the  appellant  Candido Caindoy entered his billiard hall with his shirt stained with Jblood on the right side and armpit, and upon being questioned regarding them, called said witness  Mateo Amado aside, and secretly said to him: "Say nothing about these stains,  lest someone should say they are bloodstains; especially since a Chinaman was  murdered last night Chinaman  Go Bunsuan.  Furthermore, many people  knew that Apolonio and  I were constant' companions; but  I did not help in that murder committed by  Apolonio;" and thereupon the said accused Caindoy went  to a nearby river, where he washed off the bloodstains. This testimony is corroborated  by  the affidavit Exhibit 2 presented by the defense.

All this testimony given by witnesses  whose veracity there is not in the record any reason to doubt, constitutes, to our mind, sufficient evidence that the appellant took a direct and personal part in the crime and is as much liable as his codefendant Apolonio Dumduma.

Finding no  modifying circumstance, the judgment appealed from being in accordance with the evidence and the law, the same  is hereby affirmed in toto, with costs against the appellants.  So ordered.

Avanceña, C. J.,  Johnson, Street,  Malcolm,  Villamor, Villa-Real, and Imperial, JJ., concur.