This is an appeal by the defendant from  a judgment of conviction  rendered in this cause by the Honorable Judge Simplicio del Rosario.

At dusk on the evening of June 26,1910, Lorenza Cornejo, a girl of about 15 years of age, unmarried, left her house, situated  in the pueblo of Pasay, Province of Rizal, to return some flags which she had borrowed, and  while returning home was  approached by  Francisco Reyes,  who for some time past had been courting her, making  her promises of marriage, and who had arranged with her to  accompany him to this city  for  the purpose of getting married.  On meeting, as aforesaid, Reyes insisted on  Lorenza's going away with  him,  and accordingly  advised  her to go alone to the street-car station, saying that he would follow her, so that no one might see them traveling together; but from the street named Daan-bago they went along together to the street-car station where they took a car for this city and went to the  house  of Jose  Torno, situated on Calle Cervantes,  and  there they remained and lived together conjugally  for more than fifteen  days, until  they were found by the girl's mother, Cirila Escobar, and a policeman. It is to be  noted that, during the time Reyes and Lorenza stayed  in Calle Cervantes, the former  had  carnal intercourse  with the latter about ten  times;  that, whenever the abducted girl demanded of her abductor that he fulfill his promise of marriage, he would reply that his  mother was looking for some  influential person who might speak to Lorenza's mother; and that the  girl  afterwards  learned from her own mother that  the defendant  was married, wherefore she denounced the facts to the authorities.

The provincial fiscal,  therefore, in view of the preliminary examination made  by  the justice  of the  peace court of Pasay, filed an information in the Court of First Instance of the province, charging Francisco Reyes with the crime of abduction, and the court, after due consideration of the proofs and other evidence, rendered judgment, on January 9 of this year, sentencing the defendant to the penalty of two years eleven months  and ten days of prision  correccional, to pay an indemnity of P3,000 to  the offended party, Lorenza Cornejo, and, in case of insolvency, to the corresponding subsidiary  imprisonment, in conformity with article 50, rule 1, of the Penal  Code, to  pay the  costs, and to suffer the other penalties specified in  the said judgment.

From the facts aforerelated, duly proved in this cause, it is concluded that  the crime of abduction  was committed against the person of a maiden of over 12 and under 23 years  of age, with her  consent and  with unchaste designs, a  crime provided for and punished by  article 446  of the Penal Code.   This conclusion  follows from  the  evidence which clearly proves that Francisco Reyes, from the  month of February, 1910,  used  to visit frequently  at the house of Cirila Escobar, situated in the pueblo  of Pasay, to court the latter's daughter, Lorenza  Cornejo,  and,  by  means of cajolery and  promises of marriage, succeeded in seducing the young girl, who, induced  by the defendant, left her mother's house to return a borrowed article, and,  following her abductor's  instructions, went alone toward the  street-car station in  that pueblo; when she arrived at the new highway she was joined  by the  defendant and together they boarded a street car  bound for this city and lodged at the house of Jose Torno, situated on Calle Cervantes, now Rizal  Avenue, where they were caught  together by the girl's mother  and a  policeman, between  11 and 12 o'clock of the night of the 20th of the following month of July, when they were  sitting together on  a bed in a room  of the house; Reyes was wearing a Chinese camisa, and the girl a chemisette tucked under her skirt, as testified by Cirila Escobar, the mother of the abducted girl, who had been looking for her daughter from the night  of June 26, 1910,  the date of her disappearance,  and who  for that purpose came  daily to this  city, seeking in the  suburbs, and even in the pueblo of Malabon, information  of the girl's whereabouts,  until at  last,  accompanied by a policeman from Pasay, she succeeded in finding her daughter and the defendant in the aforementioned house  of Jose Torno, on Calle Cervantes.

The departure of the abducted girl  from the  place of her residence  and  her ride  to this city in  a street  car, accompanied by her abductor, the defendant Reyes, is proved by the testimony of Telesforo Pestanas, who saw them going  along the street together toward the  street-car  station, and also by the testimony of Miguela de Guzman, who saw the girl that same evening going toward the street-car station in the  company of a man whom the witness did not know.  The  policeman,  Eugenio Wenceslao,  corroborated the testimony of Cirila Escobar,  whom he accompanied when they surprised  Lorenza  Cornejo and her abductor Reyes  in  a room of  Jose Torno's house on Calle Cervantes and  found them then and there sitting together on a bed, dressed in their underclothes.  The owners of the house, Jose Torno and Aurelia Ligdao, corroborated the testimony given relative to the stay in their house of the abductor and the abducted, as well as to the fact that the two latter were caught therein by a policeman and the offended girl's mother.

Although the abducted girl was not  forcibly  removed from the house by her abductor on the evening of the said 26th of June, yet it is unquestionable that  she, through cajolery, left  her mother's house,  by prearfangement with the  defendant and at his bidding, inasmuch as he awaited her  on the road  and they came together to this city and hid themselves from that time to the 20th of July following when  they were  caught together in the house where they were lodging. It is therefore beyond all  doubt that the defendant, Reyes, took with him the girl Lorenza Cornejo, with unchaste designs and under  a false promise of marriage, made deceitfully and in bad faith, since, as  he was married,  he  knew that  he  could  not possibly marry the abducted girl.

The crime of abduction, with unchaste designs and the consent of the abducted, was consummated,  because the girl  left her mother's house, gave herself up  to her abductor and  lived with him  conjugally until they were arrested in the house where, according to the testimony  of the abducted girl, the defendant had carnal intercourse with her no less than ten times; therefore, it is undeniable that the abduction  was committed in the manner  aforestated.

In a decision of November 30, 1875, the  supreme court of Spain,  in the matter of the application, in an analogous case, of the provisions of article  461  of the  Penal  Code of that country,  identical to  those  of article 446  of the code in force in  these Islands, established the  following principle: 

"The purpose of the law is not to punish the wrong done to the girl, provided that she consents thereto, but  to prescribe punishment for the disgrace to her family and the alarm caused  therein by the  disappearance  of one who is, by her age and  sex,  susceptible  to cajolery  and  deceit. The  place being immaterial,  no mention is  made of  it in the Penal Code."

The same principle is laid down  in the decisions of October 29, 1895, and March 31, 1896.

Notwithstanding,  then, that Lorenza Cornejo was not forcibly taken from her mother's house, yet the crime of abduction was  committed, for it is not necessary that  it should have been perpetrated in  that  manner, it being sufficient that the girl should have left, as she did, removing herself from her mother's custody and yielding to the cajolery, inducement, and promises of her abductor, who took her away with  unchaste designs.

The defendant denied the charge and pleaded not guilty, but notwithstanding  the  allegations  made in  his defense and the testimony of the witnesses presented in his behalf, the record shows decisive and conclusive proof  of his guilt, beyond  all reasonable doubt,  as the  sole convicted perpetrator by direct participation of the abduction under prosecution;  this is shown by the  statements of two witnesses who saw the abducted girl walk away from the  town where her mother's house is situated and in which she was living on the  afternoon of  June 26, 1910, accompanied  by her abductor,  the defendant,  and go  in  the direction of the street-car station; it is also  shown  by  the  corroborative testimony of the abducted girl's mother,  who set out to look for her daughter, from  early in the evening of the said date, in various parts of this city and of the Province of Rizal, until at last she found the abductor and the abducted together sitting on a bed in a room of Torno's house; this  testimony  was  also corroborated  by the policeman Eugenio Wenceslao who accompanied the mother, and all of this testimony was likewise corroborated by the owners of the house, Jose  Torno and Aurelia  Ligdao; these two witnesses, however,  in  affirming the facts above related, gave certain reasons  therefor which the court upon very good grounds, deemed unworthy of belief.  The averment by Marcelino de la Virgen can not be  held to have been proven,  which was to the effect that the mother of the abducted girl charged him to tell  the  defendant that he should give her P2,000, else he would be prosecuted.   This statement is unsupported by  proof and  was  denied by Cirila Escobar,  the  mother  of the  offended  party, who added that it was the witness Virgen who used to accompany the defendant to her house and also deceived her by assuring her that Francisco Reyes was  a bachelor.

The  readiness  with which the girl  Lorenza Cornejo, obeying the instructions  of her  abductor and his mother, testified against her own interests and those of her mother, affords a  criterion  whereby  to  gauge the readiness with which she allowed herself to be seduced  by  her abductor under the promise of marriage, which could not be fulfilled because the defendant was then  a married man.

In the commission  of  the crime there is  no attendant extenuating or  aggravating  circumstance to consider; so the  judgment of the lower court, the grounds in support of which we accept, is in accordance with the law and the merits of the case.

Therefore we are of opinion that  the judgment of conviction appealed from should be and is hereby  affirmed; provided,  however,  that  the defendant,  Francisco Reyes, shall be sentenced to the penalty of one  year  eight months and  twenty-one days of prision correecional, to the accessories  of article  61, to  pay an indemnity  of P1,000 to the offended party, Lorenza Cornejo,  and, in  case of insolvency, to the corresponding subsidiary imprisonment, which shall not exceed one-third of the principal penalty, to support the offspring,  should there be any, and to pay the costs.  So ordered.

Mapa, Johnson, Carson, and Trent, JJ., concur.