G.R. No. L‑2024
October 30, 1906

FACTS
– In July 1903 S. A. Reich and partner Rosenburg imported 41 mules for sale to the Insular Government of the Philippines.
– The mules were examined aboard the vessel by Dr. W. W. Richards (the defendant) and later by city veterinarian Dr. Best and other officials (Wilson, Hullet).
– After the purchase was completed, Reich issued a series of checks to Richards and to other officials (e.g., 50 pesos to Richards, 100 pesos to Wilson and Best, etc.).
– Reich testified that these payments were “customary gratuities” to expedite the examination and release of the mules; he denied any prior agreement or promise with any recipient.
– Richards testified that the 50‑peso check was payment for professional advice he rendered on “cribbing” in horses, not a bribe.

ISSUE
1. Whether the evidence establishes that Richards received a gift or promise in consideration of an unlawful act so as to convict him under Article 381 (bribery) of the Penal Code.
2. Whether, alternatively, the conduct falls within Article 386 (acceptance of a present in consideration of his official position).

RULING
– The Court held that conviction under Article 381 requires proof of a prior agreement or promise linking the gift to the commission of a criminal act. The only proof was the post‑transaction delivery of the check; no antecedent promise or agreement was shown. Hence, the conviction under Articles 381 and 382 was reversed.
– The Court found sufficient evidence that Richards accepted a present (50 pesos) because of his official position, without any legitimate service rendered, satisfying the elements of Article 386.
– Accordingly, Richards was convicted under Article 386, sentenced to two years’ suspension and public reprimand, ordered to confiscate the 50‑peso gift, and required to pay costs of both instances.

The judgment of the lower court is reversed in respect of Articles 381/382 and affirmed in respect of Article 386.