G.R.No.

18463,
Oct
ober04,
1922

THEPEOPLEOFTHEPHILI
PPI
NEISLANDS,PLAI
NTI
FFANDAPPELLEE,
VS.GREGORI
O
PERFECTO,
DEFENDANTANDAPPELLANT.

DECISION

MALCOLM,
J.:

Theimport
antquestionisher
esquarel
ypr
esentedofwhetherar
ticl
e256oft
heSpani
shPenal
Code,puni
shi
ng" Anypersonwho,by***wri
ti
ng,shal
ldefame,abuse,
ori
nsul
tanyMini
sterof
theCrownorotherpersoninaut
hori
ty***
,"i
sstil
li
nforce.

AboutAugust20, 1920,theSecretaryoft hePhil

ippi neSenat e,
FernandoM.Guer rero,
discover edt hatcertaindocument swhi chconsti
tut edther ecordsoft est
imonygi venby
witnessesi nt heinv esti
gati
onofoi lcompanies,haddi sappearedfr om hi
sof fice.Shortl
y
thereafter,thePhi l
ippineSenate,hav i
ngbeencal ledi ntospecialsessionbyt heGov ernor
-
Gener al,theSecr etaryoftheSenat einformedthatbodyoft helossoft hedocument sandofthe
stepst akenbyhi mt odiscoverthegui l
typarty
.Thedayf ol
lowingt heconv eningoft heSenate,
September7, 1920, thenewspaperLaNaci on,editedbyMr .Gregor i
oPerfecto, publi
shedan
arti
cler eadingasf oll
ows:

"Halfamont hhasel
apsedsincethedi
scov
ery,fort
hefi
rstti
me,ofthescandal
ousrobber
yof
recordswhichwerekeptandpreser
vedint
heironsafeoftheSenat
e,yetuptothist
imether
eis
notthesli
ghtesti
ndi
cati
onthattheaut
hororauthor
softhecrimewill
everbediscover
ed.

"Tofi
ndt hem,i
twouldnot
, perhaps,
benecessaryt
ogooutoft heSenateitsel
f,andthepersons
i
nchar geofthei
nvesti
gat
ionoft hecasewouldnothav
et odi
splaygreatskil
li
nor derto
succeedinthei
rundert
aki
ng, unl
esstheyshoul
dencountert
heinsuperabl
eobst acleofoff
ici
al
concealment.

"
Int
hatcase,
ever
yinv
est
igat
iont
obemadewoul
dbebutamer
ecomedyandnot
hingmor
e.

"Af
teral
l,
theperpet
rat
ionoftherobber
y,especi
all
yundert
heci
rcumst
ancest
hathav
e
sur
roundedit
,doesnotsurpr
iseusatall
.
"
Theexecut
ionofthecr
imewasbutt
henat
ural
eff
ectoft
heenv
ironmentoft
hepl
acei
nwhi
ch
i
twascommi t
ted.

"HowmanyofthepresentSenat
orscansaywi
thoutr
emorseinthei
rconsci
enceandwi
th
sereni
tyofmi
nd,
thattheydonotowethei
rvi
ctor
ytoelect
oral
robber
y?Howmany ?

"Theauthororauthor
softherobber
yoft
herecor
dsfrom t
hesai
dironsafeoftheSenatehave,
perhaps,butfol
l
owedt heexampl
eofcer
tai
nSenator
swhosecuredthei
relect
iont
hroughfraud
androbbery."

ThePhi li
ppineSenat e,initssessionofSept ember9, 1080, adoptedar esoluti
onaut horizi
ngits
commi t
teeonf l
ectionsandpr i
vil
egestorepor tastot heact i
onwhi chshoul dbet akenwi th
referencetot hear t
iclepubl i
shedi nLaNaci on.OnSept ember15, 1920, t
heSer i
ateadopt eda
resoluti
onaut horizingt hePresidentoftheSenat etoindor set otheAt torney-
Gener al,
forhis
studyandcor respondi ngact i
on,allt
hepaper srefer
ri
ngt ot hecaseoft henewspaperLaNaci on
andi tsedit
or, Mr.Gr egor i
oPerfecto.Asar esult
,aninf ormat ionwasf il
edi nthemuni cipalcourt
oft heCityofMani l
abyanassi stantcit
yfiscal,i
nwhicht heedi t
ori
al inquestionwassetoutand
i
nwhi chitwasal legedt hatt
hesameconst itut
edav iolationofar t
icle256oft hePenal Code.
Thedef endantGr egorioPer f
ectowasf oundgui lt
yint hemuni ci
pal courtandagai nintheCour t
ofFi r
stInstanceofMani la.

Duringthecourseoft
hetrial
int heCourtofFi
rstI
nstance,aft
ertheprosecut
ionhadrest
ed,t
he
defensemov edfort
hedismissal oft
hecase.Ont hesubjectofwhetherornotar
ti
cle256ofthe
PenalCode,underwhichtheinformati
onwaspr esented,
isinforce,
thetri
alj
udge,t
he
HonorableGeorgeR.Harvey,said:

"Thisanti
quat edpr
ov i
sionwasdoubt l
essincorporatedintot hePenal CodeofSpai nforthe
protecti
onoft heMi nister
soft heCrownandot herrepresent ati
vesoft heKi ngagainstfree
speechandact i
onbySpani shsubjects.Asev erepunishmentwaspr escri
bedbecausei twas
doubt l
essconsideredamuchmor eser i
ousoffenset oinsulttheKi ng'srepr esentat
ivethanto
i
nsul tanordinaryi
ndi vi
dual.Thisprovisi
on,withalmostal l t
heot herar ti
clesoft hatCode, was
extendedt othePhilippineIsl
andswhenundert hedomi nionofSpai nbecauset heKing'
s
subjectsinthePhili
ppi nesmi ghtdefame, abuseorinsultt heMi nist
er soft heCr ownorot her
representati
v esofHisMajesty
.Wenowhav enoMi ni
stersoftheCrownorot herpersonsin
authorit
yint hePhil
ippi
nesrepresent
ingtheKingofSpain,andsaidprovi
sion,wit
hot herar
ti
cles
ofthePenal Code,hadapparentl
ypassedint
o' i
nnocuousdesuetude/buttheSupr emeCour tof
thePhili
ppineI sl
andshas,byamaj ori
tydeci
sion,hel
dthatsaidart
icl
e256i sthelawoft hel
and
today*** .

"TheHelbi
gcaseisapr
ecedentwhich,
byt herul
eofst
aredeci
sis,
isbi
ndi
ngupont
hiscour
t
unti
lot
herwisedet
ermi
nedbyproperauthori
ty.
"

I
nthedeci
sionr
ender
edbyt
hesamej
udge,
heconcl
udedwi
tht
hef
oll
owi
ngl
anguage:

"I
ntheUni tedSt at essuchpubl i
cati
onsar eusual lynotpuni shabl eascr iminaloffenses, andl i
tt
le
i
mpor t
ancei sat tachedt ot hem, becauset heyar egener al
lyt her esultofpol it
ical contr ov ersy
andar eusual l
yr egar dedasmor eorl esscol oredorexagger at ed.Att acksoft hischar act erupon
alegislat
ivebodyar enotpuni shableundert heLibel Law.Al thoughsuchpubl i
cationsar e
reprehensibl
e, yett hiscour tfeelssomeav ersiont otheappl icationoft heprovisionofl awunder
whicht hi
scasewasf i
led.OurPenal Codehascomet ousf rom t heSpani shregi me.Ar ticle256
ofthatCodepr escr ibespuni shmentf orper sonswhousei nsul ti
ngl anguageaboutMi nist ersof
theCr ownorot her' authori
ty/TheKi ngofSpai ndoubt l
essf elttheneedofsuchpr otect i
ont ohis
ministersandot hersi nauthor it
yint hePhi li
ppinesaswel lasi nSpai n.Hence, thear t
icler efer
red
towasmadeappl i
cabl ehere.Not withstandi ngthechangeofsov er
ei gnty,ourSupr emeCour t
,in
amaj orit
ydeci sion, hashel dt hatthisprov i
sioni sst i
ll
inforce, andt hatonewhomadean
i
nsul t
ingremar kaboutt hePr esidentoft heUni t
edSt ateswaspuni shabl eunderi t.(U.S.v s.
Helbig,supra.)Ifitbeappl i
cabl einthatcase, itwoul dappeart obeappl i
cableint hiscase.
Hence, sai
dar ticle256mustbeenf orced, withoutf earorfav or,untilitshallber epeal edor
supersededbyot herl egisl
ati
on, orunt i
ltheSupr emeCour tshal lother wisedet ermi ne.

"I
nv i
ewoftheforegoi
ngconsider
ati
ons,t
hecourtf
indst
hedef endantguil
tyaschar
gedinthe
i
nformati
onandunderarti
cle256"ofthePenal
Codesentenceshimt osuffert
womont hsand
onedayofarrest
omay orandtheaccessor
ypenalt
iespr
escri
bedbyl aw,andtopaythecostsof
bothinst
ances.
"

Thefi
fteenerr
orsassignedbyt hedefendantandappel
lant
,reenf
orcedbyanextensivebri
ef,
andeloquentoral
argumentmadei nhisownbehalfandbyhi sl
earnedcounsel
,al
lreduce
themselvest
othepertinentand.deci
sivequesti
onwhichwasannouncedi nthebeginni
ngof
t
hisdeci
sion.

Itwillbenot edinthefirstplacet hatt het ri

aljudgeconsi deredhi msel fboundt of oll
owt her ule
announcedi nthecaseofUni tedSt atesv s.Helbig( R.G.No.14705, [1]notpubl i
shed) .Inthat
case, theaccusedwaschar gedwi thhav ingsai d,"Tohel lwitht hePr esi dentandhi s
proclamat i
ons, orwordst ot hatef fect,"i
nv i
olationofar ticl
e256oft hePenal Code.Hewas
foundgui lt
yi najudgmentr ender edbyt heCour tofFi rstI nstanceofMani laandagai nonappeal
totheSupr emeCour t,witht hewr iteroft heinstantdeci siondi ssent ingont wopr i
nci palgrounds:
(1)Thatt heaccusedwasdepr i
vedoft heconst it
utional rightofcr oss- exami nation, and( 2)t hat
arti
cle256oft heSpanishPenal Codei snol ongeri nf orce.Subsequent ly,onamot ionof
reconsi deration,t
hecour t,beingoft heopi niont hattheCour tofFi rstI nstancehadcommi tteda
prejudicialer r
orindeprivingt heaccusedofhi sr ighttocr oss-exami neapr incipal witness, set
asidet hej udgmentaf fi
rmi ngt hej udgmentappeal edf rom andor der edt her eturnoft herecor d
tothecour tofor i
ginfort hecel ebrationofanewt ri
al.Whet hersuchat ri
al wasact ual l
yhad, i
s
notknown, butatleast,ther ecor dint heHel bigcasehasnev eragai nbeenel evatedt ot hiscour t
.

Theremayper chanceexistsomedoubtast otheaut hori

tyofthedeci sionintheHel bigcase, i
n
viewoftheci rcumstancesabov edescribed.Thismuch, however, i
scer t
ain:Thef act
soft he
Helbigcaseandt hecasebef or
eus, whichwemayt ermt hePerfectocase, aredi f
fer
ent,forin
thefir
stcaset herewasanor aldef
amat ion,whileinthesecondt herei sawr it
tendef amation.
Notonlythis,butanewpoi ntwhich,undert hefacts,couldnothav ebeenconsi deredinthe
Helbigcase, i
s,inthePerfectocase,urgedupont hecour t
.And,finall
y,asisappar enttoall,t
he
appell
atecour tisnotrest
rained,aswast hetri
alcourt,bystr
ictadher encetoaf ormerdecision.
Wemuchpr efertoresol
vet hequesti
onbef oreusunhi nderedbyr eferencest otheHel bi
g
decisi
on.

Thi si
soneoft hosecasesonwhi chav ar
ietyofopinionsall l
eadingtothesamer esultcanbe
had.Amaj ori
tyoft hecourtareoft heopi nionthatthePhi li
ppineLibelLaw,ActNo.277, hashad
theeffectofr epeali
ngsomuchofar t
icle256oft hePenal Codeasr elat
estowr i
ttendefamation,
abuse, orinsult
,andt hatunderthei nformat i
onandt hef acts,thedefendantisnei
therguil
tyofa
violat
ionofar ti
cle256oft hePenal Code, noroftheLi belLaw.Thev iewoft heChiefJusti
ceis
thattheaccusedshoul dbeacqui t
t edf orthereasont hatthef actsal
legedintheinfor
mat i
ondo
notconst i
tuteav iolat
ionofarti
cle256oft hePenalCode.Thr eemember soft hecourtbeli
eve
thatarticl
e256wasabr ogatedcompl et el
ybyt hechangef r
om Spani shtoAmer i
cansov er
eignty
ov ert
hePhi li
ppinesandi sinconsistentwi thdemocr aticpri
nciplesofgov er
nment .
Wit
houtpr
ejudi
cet
otherightofanymemberoft
hecour
ttoexpl
ainhi
sposi
ti
on,
wewi
l
ldi
scuss
t
hetwomainpoint
sjustmentioned.

Eff
ectoft hePhi li
ppineLibel Law, ActNo.277, onarti
cle256oft heSpani shPenal Code.—The
Li
bel Law,ActNo.277, wasenact edbyt hePhi l
ippi
neCommi ssi
onshor tlyaft
ertheor gani
zation
ofthislegi
slativebody .Sect i
on1def inesli
bel asa" malici
ousdef amation,expressedeitherin
wri
ting,pri
nting,orbysi gnsorpi ct ures,orthel i
ke,orpublictheat r
ical
exhi bi
ti
ons,tendingto
bl
ackent hememor yofonewhoi sdeadort oi mpeacht hehonest y,vi
rt
ue, orreputat
ion,or
publi
sht heallegedornat uraldefect sofonewhoi sal
ive,andt herebyexposehi mt opubl i
c
hatr
ed, cont
emptorr i
dicule."Section13pr ov idesthat"Alll
awsandpar tsoflawsnowi nforce,
sofarast hesamemaybei nconf lictherewith,areherebyr epealed.*** "

Thatpar t
sofl awsi nf orcein1901whent heLi belLawt ookeffect,wereinconflicttherewi th,
andt hattheLi bel Lawabr ogatedcer t
ainpor tionsoftheSpani shPenal Code, cannotbegai nsai
d.
Titl
eXofBookI IofthePenal Code, cov er
ingt hesubject sofcalumnyandi nsults,musthav e
beenpar ticularl
yaf fectedbyt heLibel Law.I ndeed, i
nt heearl
ycaseofPar dodeTav er
av s.
Gar ci
aVal dez( [1902] ,
1.Phi l
.,
468),theSupr emeCour tspokeoft heLibelLawas" reformi ngt he
preexisti
ngSpani shl awont hesubjectofcal umni aandi nj
uri
a."Recently
,specificattentionwas
gi
v entot heef fectoft heLi belLawont hepr ov isi
onsoft hePenal Code,deal
ingwi t
hcal umny
andi nsul
ts, andi twasf oundt hatt
hosepr ovisionsoft hePenal Codeont hesubj ectofcal umny
andi nsul
tsi nwhi cht heel ement sofwr iti
ngandpubl i
cityentered,wereabrogat edbyt heLi bel
Law.( Peoplev s.Cast r
o[ 1922],p.842, ante.)

TheLibelLawmusthavehadt
hesamer
esul
tonot
herpr
ovi
sionsoft
hePenal
Code,
asf
or
i
nstance,
ar t
icl
e256.

Thef actsher ear ethatt heeditorofanewspaperpubl i

shedanar t
icle,natur all
yinwr iti
ng, which
mayhav ehadt het endencyt oimpeacht hehonest y,virt
ue, orreput ationofmember soft he
Phil
ippineSenat e,therebypossi blyexposingt hem t opubl ichat red,cont empt ,orri
dicule,which
i
sexact lyli
bel,asdef inedbyt heLi belLaw.Si rJ.F.St epheni sauthor ityfort hestatementt hata
l
ibelisindictablewhendef aminga" bodyofper sonsdef i
nit
eandsmal lenoughf orindividual
member stober ecogni zedassuch, inorbymeansofany thingcapabl eofbei ngal ibel.
"(Digest
ofCriminal Law, art
.267. )ButintheUni t
edSt ates, whileitmaybepr opert opr osecute
cri
mi nall
ytheaut horofal i
belchar gi
ngal egi slat orwithcor rupti
on, cr i
ti
cisms, nomat terhow
severe,onal egi slature,arewithinther angeoft helibertyoft hepr ess, unlesst heintentionand
eff
ectbesedi ti
ous.( 3Whar ton'
sCr i
minal Law, p.2131. )Wi ththesef actsandl egalprinciplesin
mind, r
ecallthatar t
icle256begi ns: "
Anyper sonwho, by***wr iti
ng, shalldef ame, abuse, or
i
nsultanyMi nisteroft heCr ownorot herper soni naut hori
ty,"etc.
TheLibel Lawisacompl eteandcompr ehensi velawont hesubj ectoflibel.Thewel l-
knownr ul
e
ofstatutoryconstr
ucti
oni s,t
hatwheret hel aterst atutecl earlycoverst heol dsubject-
mat t
erof
antecedentacts,anditplainl
yappearstohav ebeent hepur poseoft hel egisl
aturetogive
expresssioninittothewhol elawont hesubj ect,pr eviousl awsar ehel dt ober epealedby
necessaryimplicati
on.(1Lewi s'
Sutherl
andSt atutor yConst ruct
ion,p.465. )Forident i
cal
reasons,itisevi
dentthatActNo.277hadt heef fectofr epeal i
ngar t
icle256oft hePenal Code,
oratleastsomuchoft hisarti
cleaspuni shesdef amat i
on, abuse, orinsultsbywr it
ing.

ActNo.292ofthePhi
li
ppi
neCommi ssi
on,theTr
easonandSedi
ti
onLaw,mayalsohave
af
fect
edarti
cl
e256,butastot
hispoint
,iti
snotnecessar
ytomakeapr
onouncement.

Eff
ectoft hechangef r
om SpanishtoAmer icansovereigntyov ert hePhili
ppinesonar t
icl
e256
oftheSpani shPenal Code.—Appellant'
smai npr
opositionint hel owercour tandagain
energeti
call
ypr essedintheappellatecourtwasthatar t
icle256oft heSpanishPenalCodei s
notnowi nf orcebecauseabrogatedbyt hechangef r
om Spani sht oAmericansovereigntyover
thePhili
ppinesandbecausei nconsi st
entwithdemocr ati
cpr inciplesofgov ernment.Thisview
wasi ndi
rectlyfavoredbythetr
ialjudge,and,asbefor
est ated,ist heopini
onoft hr
eemember s
ofthiscourt.

Article256i sf oundi nChapt erVofTi tleIIIofBookI Ioft heSpani shPenal Code.Ti t

leIofBook
IIpuni shest hecr i
mesoft r
eason, crimest hatendangert hepeaceori ndependenceoft hest ate,
crimesagai nsti nt ernat i
onal law, andt hecr i
meofpi racy .TitleI Iofthesamebookpuni shesthe
crimesofl esemaj est e,cr i
mesagai nstt heCor tesandi tsmember sandagai nstthecounci lof
mi nist ers,cr i
mesagai nstt hef orm ofgov ernment ,andcr imescommi tt
edont heoccasi onof
theexer ciseofr i
ght sguar anteedbyt hef undament al lawsoft hest at e,i
ncludingcr i
mesagai nst
reli
gi onandwor shi p.Ti t
leI I
Ioft hesameBook, inwhi char t
icle256i sf ound, punishest he
crimesofr ebel lion, sedition,assaul tsuponper sonsi naut hor i
ty,andt heiragent s,and
cont empt s, insul ts, inj
urias,andt hreat sagai nstper sonsi naut hor i
ty,andi nsults,inj
urias,and
threat sagai nstt hei ragent sandot herpubl i
cofficer s,thel astbei ngt hetitletoChapt erV.The
fir
stt woar ti
cl esi nChapt erVdef i
neandpuni sht heof f
enseofcont emptcommi t
tedbyanyone
whoshal lbywor dordeeddef ame, abuse, insult,ort hreat enami nisteroft hecr own, orany
per soni naut hor it
y .Thenwi thanar ticlecondemni ngchal l
engest of ightduel sintervening,
comesar ti
cl e256, nowbei ngwei ghedi nt hebal ance.I tr eadsasf ollows: "Anyper sonwho, by
wor d, deed, orwr i
ting, shalldef ame, abuse, orinsul tanyMi nisteroft heCr ownorot herper son
i
naut hor i
ty,whi leengagedi nt heper formanceofof fi
cial dut i
es, orbyr easonofsuch
per formance, prov idedt hatt heof f
ensi veconductdoesnott akepl acei nt hepr esenceofsuch
mi nist erorper son, ortheof fensi vewr i
tingbenotaddr essedt ohi m, shallsuf f
erthepenal t
yof
arrest omay or ,"—thati s, t
hedef amat i
on, abuse, ori nsul tofanyMi nisteroft heCr ownoft he
Monar
chyofSpai
n(forther
ecouldnotbeaMi
nist
eroft
heCrowni
ntheUni
tedSt
atesof
Ameri
ca)
,orot
herpersoninaut
hori
tyi
ntheMonar
chyofSpai
n.

Itcannotadmi tofdoubtthatallt
hosepr ovi
sionsoftheSpani shPenal Codehav ingtodowith
suchsubj ect
sast reason,
lesemaj este, r
eli
gionandwor ship,
r ebell
ion,sedit
ion,andcontempts
ofmi ni
stersofthecr own,ar
enol ongeri nforce.Ourpresentt ask, ther
efore,isadeterminat
ion
ofwhet herart
icl
e256hasmett hesamef ate,or,
mor especi f
icallystated,whetheriti
sinthe
natureofamuni ci
pal l
aworapol i
ti
cal law,andisconsi stentwi ththeConst i
tuti
onandl awsof
theUnitedStatesandt hecharacteri
sticsandi nsti
tut
ionsoft heAmer i
canGov ernment.

Itisagener al pri
ncipleoft hepubl iclawt hatonacqui sitionoft er
ritoryt hepr ev i
ouspol itical
relationsoft hecededr egionaret otallyabrogat ed." Pol i
tical"isher eusedt odenomi natet he
l
awsr egul atingt her elati
onssust ainedbyt hei nhabi tantst ot hesov ereign.(Amer i
canI nsur ance
Co.v s.Cant er[ 1828] ,1Pet .
,511; Chicago, RockI slandandPaci f
icRai lwayCo.v s.McGl i
nn
[1885] , 114U.S. ,542; Roav s.Collect orofCust oms[ 1912] ,23Phi l.,315. )Mr .JusticeFi eldof
theUni tedSt at esSupr emeCour tst atedtheobv iouswheni nthecour seofhi sopi nioni nt he
caseofChi cago, RockI slandandPaci f
icRai l
wayCo.v s.McGl i
nn, supr a, hesai d:"Asamat t
erof
cour se, alllaws, ordinancesandr egul ati
onsi nconf l
ictwi t hthepol iti
cal char acter,insti
tut i
ons
andConst i
tut ionoft henewgov ernmentar eatoncedi splaced.Thus, uponacessi onofpol i
t i
cal
j
ur i
sdi ct i
onandl egislativ
epower —andt helatteri sinv olvedi nt hefor mer —t ot heUni tedSt at es,
thel awsoft hecount ryinsuppor tofanest ablishedr eligionorabr i
dgi ngt hefreedom oft he
press, oraut hor i
zingcr uelandunusual punishment s, andt hel i
ke, woul datonceceaset obeof
obligat oryf or cewi t
houtanydecl arationtot hatef fect .
"Toquot eagai nf rom t heUni tedSt ates
Supr emeCour t:"I
tcannotbeadmi t
tedt hattheKi ngofSpai ncoul d, byt reatyorot her wise,
i
mpar ttot heUni tedSt atesanyofhi sroyalprer ogativ es;andmuchl esscani tbeadmi ttedt hat
theyhav ecapaci tyt oreceiveorpowert oexer ciset hem.Ev erynat i
onacqui r
ingt errit
ory, by
treatyorot her wise, musthol ditsubj ecttot heConst itutionandl awsofi tsowngov ernment , and
notaccor dingt othoseoft hegov ernmentcedi ngi t
."( Pollardv s.Hagan[ 1845] ,3How. ,210. )

OnAmer i
canoccupat i
onoft hePhi li
ppines, byi nstructionsoft hePresi
denttot heMi li
tar
y
Commanderdat edMay28, 1898, andbypr ocl amat ionoft helatt
er,t
hemuni cipallawsoft he
conqueredterr
itor
yaf fectingpr i
vater i
ghtsofper sonandpr opertyandprovi
dingf ort he
punishmentofcr i
mewer enomi nallycontinuedi nf orceinsof arastheywer ecompat i
blewit
h
thenewor derofthings.ButPr esi
dentMcKi nl ey,inhi sinstruct
ionstoGeneral Merritt,was
carefult
osay:"Thef i
rstef fectofthemi l
i
t ar
yoccupat i
onoft heenemy '
sterr
itoryist he
severanceoftheformerpol iti
calrelati
onoft hei nhabi t
antsandt heestabli
shmentofanew
poli
tical
power."From t hatdayt ot his,
theSpani shcodes, ascodes,havebeenconst antl
y
appli
ed,andordinaril
yithasbeent akenf orgr ant edt hattheprovisi
onsunderconsi derati
on
werest il
leff
ectiv
e.Topar aphraset helanguageoft heUnitedStatesSupr emeCour tinWeems
vs.UnitedStates( [
1910] ,217U.S. ,349),therewasnotandcoul dnotbe, exceptasprecise
questionswer epresent ed,acar efulconsiderat
ionofthecodal provi
sionsandadet er
minat i
on
oftheext enttowhi cht heyaccor dedwi t
horwer er
epugnanttot he"'greatpri
ncipl
esofliberty
andlaw' whichhadbeen' madet hebasi sofourgov er
nment alsystem.'"Butwhent hequest i
on
hasbeensquar elyraised,theappel lat
ecour thasbeenforcedonoccasi ontoholdcertai
n
porti
onsoft heSpani shcodesr epugnantt odemocr ati
cinsti
tuti
onsandAmer i
canconstituti
onal
pri
nciples.(U.S.v s.Sweet[ 1901] ,1Phil
.,18;U.S.vs.Balcort
a[1913],25Phi l.
,273;U.S.v s.
Smith[ 1919],
39Phi l
.
, 533;Weemsv s.U.S.,supra.
)

Thenatureofthegovernmentwhichhasbeensetupi nthePhi
li
ppi
nesunderAmeri
can
soverei
gntywasoutl
inedbyPresidentMcKinl
eyinthatMagnaChart
aofPhil
ippi
nel
iber
ty,
his
i
nstruct
ionstotheCommi ssi
on,ofApri
l7,1900.I
npar t
,thePr
esi
dentsai
d:

"I
nal lthef ormsofgov ernmentandadmi nistrat i
vepr ov i
sionswhi cht heyar eaut hor i
zedt o
prescr i
be, t
heCommi ssionshoul dbeari nmi ndt hatt hegov ernmentwhi cht heyar eest ablishing
i
sdesi gnednotf oroursat isf
act i
onorf ort heexpr essi onofourt heor eti
cal vi
ews, butf ort he
happi ness, peace, andpr osper ityoft hepeopl eoft hePhi li
ppineI slands, andt hemeasur es
adopt edshoul dbemadet oconf or mt ot hei rcust oms, theirhabits, andev enthei rprejudi ces,to
thef ull
estext entconsi stentwi tht heaccompl i
shmentoft heindi spensabl erequi sit
esofj ust
andef f
ect i
vegov ernment .Att hesamet i
met heCommi ssionshoul dbeari nmi nd, andt he
peopl eoft heI slandsshoul dbemadepl ai nlyt ounder stand,thatt herear ecertaingr eat
pri
nci plesofgov ernmentwhi chhav ebeenmadet hebasi sofourgov ernment al system, whi ch
wedeem essent ialtot her uleofl awandt hemai ntenanceofi ndividual freedom, andofwhi ch
theyhav e,unfortunat ely,beendeni edt heexper iencepossessedbyus; thatther ear ealso
certainpr acti
cal r
ulesofgov ernmentwhi chwehav ef oundt obeessent i
al t
ot hepr eser vat i
onof
thesegr eatprinciplesofl i
ber t
yandl aw, andt hatt hesepr i
nciplesandt heser ulesofgov ernment
mustbeest ablishedandmai nt ainedi nthei rislandsf ort hesakeoft heirlibertyandhappi ness,
howev ermucht heymayconf l
ictwi tht hecust omsorl awsofpr ocedur ewi t
hwhi cht heyar e
fami l
iar.Itisev i
dentt hatt hemostenl i
ght enedt houghtoft hePhi l
ippineI slandsf ully
appr eciatesthei mpor tanceoft hesepr inci plesandr ul es,andt heywi ll
inev i
tablywi thinashor t
ti
mecommanduni v ersal assent ."

Thecourtshavenatur
all
yt akenthesameview.Mr.Just
iceEll
iot
t,speaki
ngf orourSupreme
Court
,inthecaseofUnitedSt at
esvs.Bul
l([
1910]
,15Phil.
,7),
said:"ThePresidentand
Congressfr
amedt hegov ernmentonthemodelwithwhichAmer i
cansaref amili
ar,andwhi
ch
hasprovenbestadaptedf ort
headvancementofthepubli
cinter
estsandthepr otecti
onof
i
ndivi
dualri
ghtsandpriv
ileges."
Therefore,i
thascomewi t
hsomewhatofashockt ohearthestatementmadet hatthe
happiness,peace,andprosperi
tyofthepeopleofthePhil
i
ppineIslandsandthei
rcustoms,
habit
s, andprej
udices,t
ofoll
owt helanguageofPresi
dentMcKinley,demandobeisancet
o
authori
ty,androyalprot
ecti
onforthatauthori
ty.

Accor dingt oourv iew, article256oft heSpani shPenal Codewasenact edbyt heGov ernmentof
Spai nt opr otectSpani shof fi
cialswhower et her epresentativesoft heKi ng.Wi t
ht hechangeof
sov ereignt y,anewgov ernment ,andanewt heor yofgov ernment , wassetupi nt hePhi l
ippines.
Itwasi nnosenseacont inuat i
onoft heol d, althoughmer elyf orconv eniencecer tainoft he
existingi nstituti
onsandl awswer econtinued.Thedemandswhi cht henewgov ernmentmade,
andmakes, ont heindiv i
dual ci
tizenarelikewi sedifferent.Nol ongeri sthereaMi nisteroft he
Crownoraper soni naut hor i
tyofsuchexal tedposi ti
ont hatt heci tizenmustspeakofhi m onl y
withbat edbr eath."Int heey eofourConst itutionandl aws, ev erymani sasov ereign, ar ulerand
af r
eeman, andhasequal rightswi t
hev eryot herman.Wehav enor ankorst ati
on, exceptt hatof
respect abi l
it
yandi ntell
igenceasopposedt oi ndecencyandi gnor ance, andt hedoort ot hisr ank
standsopent oev erymant of r
eelyenterandabi det herein,ifhei squal if
ied,andwhet herhei s
qual i
fiedornotdependsupont helif
eandchar acterandat tainment sandconductofeach
personf orhi mself.Ev erymanmayl awfullydowhathewi ll
, sol ongasi ti snotmal um i nseor
mal um pr ohibit
um ordoesnoti nfri
ngeupont heequal lysacr edr ight sofot her
s."( Statev s.
Shepher d[ 1903],177Mo. ,205; 99A.S.R. ,624. )

Iti
struet hati nEngl and, from whi chsomanyoft helawsandi nstituti
onsoft heUni t
edSt ates
arederived, therewer eoncest atut esofscandal um magnat um, underwhi chwor dswhi chwoul d
notbeact ionabl eifspokenofanor dinar
ysubj ectwer emadeact i
onabl ei fspokenofapeerof
therealm orofanyoft hegr eatof ficer soft heCr own, withoutpr oofofanyspeci al damage.The
CrownofEngl and,unf ortunat el
y,tookav iewl esst olerantthant hatofot hersov er eigns, asf or
i
nstance, theEmper orsAugust us, Caesar , andTi berius.TheseEngl ishst atuteshav e, howev er,
l
ongsi nce, becomeobsol ete,whi l
ei nt heUni tedSt ates,theof fenseofscandal um magnat um is
notknown.I nt heear l
yday soft heAmer icanRepubl ic,asedi t
ionl awwasenact ed, maki ngitan
off
enset ol ibel t
heGov ernment ,theCongr ess, orthePr esi
dentoft heUni tedStat es, butt hel aw
metwi thsomuchpopul ardi sappr ov al,t
hati twassoonr epealed." I
nt hiscount rynodi stinction
astoper sonsi srecogni zed, andi npr act
iceaper sonhol di
ngahi ghof ficei sregar dedasa
tar
getatwhom anyper sonmayl etf l
yhispoi sonouswor ds.Highof fi
cial positi
on, inst eadof
aff
ordingi mmuni tyfrom sl ander ousandl i
bel ouschar ges, seemsr athert ober egar dedas
makinghi schar acterfreepl underf oranyonewhodesi r
est ocreat easensat ionbyat tackingi t
."
(Newell,SlanderandLi bel,3ded. , p.245; Si l
lar sv s.Colli
er[1890] ,151Mass. ,50;6L.R.A. ,
680. )
Arti
cle256oft hePenal Codeiscont raryt othegeni usandfundament alpri
nci pl
esoft he
Amer i
canchar acterandsy stem ofgov er nment .Thegulfwhichsepar atest hisart
iclefrom the
spir
itwhichinspiresallpenal l
egislat
ionofAmer i
canor i
gin,i
saswi deast hatwhi chsepar atesa
monar chyfr
om ademocr aticr
epubl i
cliket hatoftheUni t
edSt ates.Thisarticlewascr owded
outbyi mpli
cationassoonast heUni t
edSt atesestabli
sheditsauthorityinthePhi li
ppineIslands.
Penalti
esoutofal lpropor t
iontot hegrav it
yoft heof f
ense,groundedi nadi stort
edmonar chical
conceptionofthenat ureofpol it
icalauthor i
ty,asopposedt ot heAmer icanconcept ionoft he
prot
ect i
onofthei nterestsofthepubl i
c, hav ebeenobl i
ter
atedbyt hepr esentsy stem of
governmentint heIslands.

From anent irelydiff

er entpointofv i
ew, itmustbenot edt hatthi
sar t
iclepuni shescontempt s
againstexecut iveofficial
s,althoughi tstermsarebr oadenought ocov ert heenti
reoffi
cialclass.
Punishmentf orcont emptofnon-j udicialoff
icershasnopl aceinagov er nmentbasedupon
Amer icanprinciples.Ourof fi
ci al
classi snot,asinmonar chies,anagentofsomeaut hor i
ty
greaterthan, t
hepeopl ebutiti sanagentandser vantofthepeopl ethemsel v
es.Theseof fi
cials
areonl yenti
tledt orespectandobedi encewhent heyar eactingwithi
nt hescopeoft heir
authorityandj uri
sdiction.TheAmer icansy st
em ofgov ernmenti scalcul atedtoenforcerespect
andobedi encewher esuchr espectandobedi encei sdue, butneverdoesi tpl
acearoundt he
i
ndividual whohappenst ooccupyanof fi
cialpositi
onbymandat eoft hepeopl eanyof f
icialhalo,
whichcal l
sf ordrasticpuni shmentf orcont empt uousr emar ks.

Thecri
meofl esemajest
edi
sappear
edi
nthePhil
ippi
neswi
ththerat
if
icat
ionoft
heTr
eat
yof
Par
is.Mini
stersoft
heCrownhavenopl
aceundertheAmer
icanfl
ag.

Tosummar ize,t
heresulti
s,thatal
lthemembersofthecour
tareoftheopini
on,al
thoughfor
di
ffer
entreasons,t
hatthejudgmentshoul dber
ever
sedandthedefendantandappell
ant
acqui
tted,
withcostsdeoffici
o.Soor der
ed.

Ost
rand,
andJohns,
JJ.
,concur
.
[
1]Deci
dedMar
ch16,
1920.

CONCURRI
NG

ARAULLO,
C.J.
,

Iconcurwi t
ht hedi spositi
vepar toftheforegoi
ngdeci si
on, thati
s,withtheacquit
talofthe
accused, f
ort hesol ereasont hatthefactsall
egedint heinformationdonotconst i
tutea
vi
olati
onofar ti
cle256oft hePenal Code; f
oralt
hought hatar t
icl
eisinforcewithrespectto
cal
umny ,i
njuria,
ori nsult
,bydeedorwor d,
againstanaut horit
yintheperformanceofhi sduties
orbyr easont hereof,outsi
deofhi spr esence,i
tisrepealedbyt heLibelLawi nsofarasitrefers
tocalumny ,injur
ia,orinsultcommi t
tedagainstanauthor i
tybywr it
ingorprinti
ng,
aswast hat
i
nsertedint hesai dinformation.

CONCURRI
NG

ROMUALDEZ,
J.,
wit
hwhom concurJOHNSON,
STREET,
AVACEÑA,
andVI
LLAMOR,
JJ.
,
Iconcurwit
htheresul
t.Ibeli
evethatt
heresponsi
bil
it
yoftheaccusedhasnotbeenshown
ei
therunderar
ti
cle256oft hePenalCodeorundertheLi
belLaw.

Iam oftheopinionthatarti
cle256ofthePenalCodeissti
lli
nforce,exceptasi
tref
ersto
"Mi
nister
softheCr own,"whom wedonothav einourGovernment,andtocalumny,i
njur
ia,or
i
nsult,
bywr i
ti
ngorpr int
ing,committ
edagainstanauthori
tyint
heper for
manceofhisdutiesor
byreasonthereof,whichporti
onwasr epeal
edbytheLibelLaw.

Judgmentr
ever
sed,
def
endantacqui
tt
ed.