This  defendant was  accused of the crime  of conspiring to commit sedition.  The complaint was in  the following language:

"That on or about the 1st  day of September, 1910, the said defendant, in and around the township of  Bambang, Nueva Vizcaya,  in the jurisdiction of this court,  did conspire to rise publicly and tumultuously in order to attain by  force or outside of legal methods, the infliction of acts of hate or revenge upon officials or agents of the Insular Government, the provincial government of Nueva Vizcaya, and the municipal government of Bambang; the infliction, with a political or social object, of acts of hate or revenge upon certain  individuals or classes of individuals in the Islands; the despoliation, with a political or social object, of certain classes of persons, natural and artificial, in the township of Bambang, the Province of Nueva Vizcaya, and the Insular Government, and the property thereof; and did utter seditious  words tending to instigate others  to cabal or meet together for unlawful purposes, suggesting or inciting rebellious conspiracies, tending to stir up the people against the lawful authorities and tending to disturb the peace of the community and the safety and order of the Government, and did knowingly  conceal such  evil practices  from  the constituted authorities; contrary to law."

Upon this complaint the defendant was duly arrested and upon arraignment pleaded "not guilty."

After hearing the evidence adduced  during the trial of the cause, the Honorable Richard Campbell, judge, found the defendant guilty of the crime of conspiring to commit sedition, as  alleged in the complaint, and sentenced him to be imprisoned for a  period of three years, to pay a fine of Pl,000, and in case  of insolvency to suffer subsidiary  imprisonment  in accordance with the  law, and to pay  the costs.

From the sentence of the lower court the defendant appealed and made the following assignments of error in this court:

"I.  The court erred in not dismissing the case for  the reason that  the complaint was defective.

"IL. The court erred in finding that the  evidence introduced at the trial by the prosecution justifies the conviction of the defendant.

"Ill,  The court erred in not acquitting  the  defendant, inasmuch as his guilt was not proved beyond all reasonable doubt."

With reference to the  first assignment  of error it will be noted that no objection whatever was made in the court below with reference to  the  sufficiency of the complaint. This  court has held in many decisions that when no objection is made to the sufficiency of the complaint in the court below, the objection will not be considered on appeal.  Objections of this character can not be considered for the first time  on  appeal.   (U. S.  vs.. Mabanag, 1 Phil. Rep.,  441; U. S. vs. Cajayon, 2 Phil.  Rep., 570; U. S. vs. Mack, 4 Phil. Rep., 291; U. S. vs.  Sarabia, 4 Phil Rep., 566; Mortiga vs. Serra, 5 Phil. Rep., 34; (See also  204 U. S.,  470, and 11 Phil.  Rep., 762); U. S, vs. Paraiso, 5 Phil. Rep., 149;  (See also case  of Paraiso, 207 U.  S., 368, also 11 Phil.  Rep., 799) ; U. S. vs. Aldos, 6 Phil.  Rep., 381; U. S. vs. Eusebio, 8 Phil. Rep., 574; U. S. vs.  Flores, 9 Phil. Rep., 47; U. S. vs. Lampano, 13 Phil. Rep.,  409.)

The other two assignments  of error relate only to the sufficiency  of the  evidence.  Many  witnesses  were  presented both by  the  government and the defendant.   The facts  in the present case bear  a very close relation to the facts  in the  cases of U. S.  vs. Mandac^[1] (No. 6763), and U. S. vs. Isidro Olano ^[2] (No. 6882).

After hearing the evidence, the Honorable Richard Campbell, judge, in his decision, made the following findings of fact.

"After seeing the witnesses and hearing them testify, and after  carefully observing  their conduct and bearing while on the witness stand, and after considering all the evidence and listening to the arguments of counsel on both sides, the court declares to have been proven the following facts beyond a reasonable  doubt:

"That on the 1st day of September, 1910, an uprising or insurrection against the authority of the United States in the Philippine Islands, and having for its object the overthrow of  the Government of  the  Philippine  Islands,  and provincial and  municipal  governments of the Province of Nueva  Vizcaya and other  provinces  in  the Philippine Islands, took place in and about the township of Solano in the Province of Nueva Vizcaya.

"That the defendant, Maximino Planas, was the president of the  town of Bambang,  Nueva  Vizcaya,  duly  elected, qualified, and acting as such on and  during all the dates and times  mentioned in the complaint.  That on the 3d day of September, 1910, the said Maximino Planas called together the  policemen of the said town of Bambang and said to them,  'The insurrectos have  entered Solano and seized the money from the treasury, burned the papers, and made prisoners of the padres.  Now you must bring your arms to my house so that. I  can deliver  them to the insurrectos when they reach here and you must all be ready to join the insurrectos when  they reach  Bambang  because I am captain of insurrectos, and when they come  we will kill the Americans Bennett  and Scott and the Romanista padre,  and burn the convent.  Do not tell anything of this to the Americans or the insurrectos will kill you when they come,'  or words to that effect.  That on Sunday,  the 4th day of September, 1910, between 9 and 10 o'clock, the councilmen  of Bambang  assembled at the presidencia  of said town in obedience to a call or bandillo which had been published the previous evening in said town by the defendant. At this meeting there were  present the following  councilmen : Proceso Sierra, Martin Apno, Marcelino Alvarez, Angel Malonoy,  Santiago  Corales, and  Francisco Pugayan, and President Planas, the accused.  And that the  accused then told the assembled councilmen that the  insurrectos had entered Solano, seized the  municipal funds,  burned the papers,  and  made  prisoners  of the Romanista  padres. 'Prepare your people with  arms, bolos, spears, and arrows, and when the insurrectos  arrive in this town  be ready  to join them,  and then we  will kill the Americans Bennett and Scott and the Romanista padre/ or words to that effect.

"That on the 2d day of September, 1910,  in the house of the Councilman Martin  Apno,  of the town of Bambang, Nueva  Vizcaya, the accused had a conversation with the aforementioned  Councilman Martin Apno in which the accused said 'Do you know what has happened in Solano? The insurrectos  have  entered there and taken the money and burned the  papers,' and that said  Councilman Apno must prepare bolos, lances, and other arms and when the insurrectos entered be  prepared  to join  them and that after that they would kill Mr.  Bennett and Mr. Scott and the Roman padre of the  town of Bambang, Nueva Vizcaya.

"These  facts  were  conclusively  and  overwhelmingly proven by the testimony of the prosecution which consisted of the evidence of four policemen of the town of Bambang, Pantaleon Pugayan,  Pedro Sierra,  Santiago Angala, and Emeterio  Marquez; three councilmen  of said town whose names were Proceso Sierra, Martin Apno, and Angel Malanoy, and  the municipal treasurer of Bambang, Ventura Bernal, and his clerk Martiniano Miralles.   The policemen testified that they  assembled, four in number, at  about 4 o'clock in  the afternoon  in the  presidencia of Bambang  by order of the defendant on the 3d of September, 1910, and that the defendant then  told them to deliver their  arms to his house as he, the defendant, was a captain of insurrectos and that he (the defendant) would  deliver said arms to the insurrectos when they entered the town of Bambang.  The defendant also told the four policemen that the insurrectos had already entered Solano, seized the municipal funds and burned the papers, and  that when they  (the insurrectos) reached Bambang to be  ready to join them and that they would then kill the two Americans, Bennett and Scott, and the Roman padre and  burn the convent.  On the next day, the 4th of September, when six councilmen assembled  in the presidencia of  Bambang in obedience to his order the defendant repeated substantially the same  conversation  as he  had with the policemen.  He  told the councilmen  to prepare their people with arms of all kinds, bolos, lances, and arrows, and be ready to join the insurrectos when they reached Bambang, after which they (the insurrectos) would kill the Americans Scott and Bennett, and the Romanista padre, and burn the convent.  He also told the councilmen that the insurrectos had already entered Solano, seized the municipal funds and  burned  the papers, and that when they  (the insurrectos) entered Bambang, they, the councilmen and their people, would hear the salvos of the police at the  presidencia and  this would  be the signal to join forces with the  insurrectos."

After a careful reading of the evidence adduced during the trial of the cause and brought to this court, we are of the opinion that the findings  of fact made by the lower court are in accordance with such evidence, and show that the defendant was guilty of the crime charged beyond per-adventure of  doubt, and that the sentence imposed by the lower court is in  accordance with  the law.   (Sec, 7,  Act No. 292.)   The  sentence of the lower court  is, therefore, hereby  affirmed with costs.

Arellano, C. J.,  Torres,  Carson, Moreland, and Trent, JJ., concur.

---

^[1] See Notes, post.
^[2] See Notes, post.