Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 20.pdf/57

 26

THE GREEN BAG

The work done by Judge Ide in improving the law of civil procedure, like that of Major Young on the criminal side, very greatly decreased the Law's delay, which under the Spanish regime had too often practically amounted to a denial of justice. But the Spanish substantive law governing property rights, like that governing per sonal liberty, is, as a whole, a noble and enduring piece of workmanship. Their Codes are compact, yet sufficient. Their principles had already stood the test of time when we as a nation were in our swad dling clothes. Before the Norman Con quest of England, Spain had prepared a Code called the Siete Partidas (seven parts), which a respectable English-speaking histo rian has characterized as "the most valu able monument of legislation, not merely of Spain, but of Europe, since the publica tion of the Roman (Justinian) Code." The writer well recalls reading a printed brief concerning certain church property litiga tion, prepared at Manila by the late Arch bishop Chapelle, the Apostolic Delegate, one of the most learned Catholic prelates of modern times, in which his Grace re ferred to the Siete Partidas in terms of eloquent praise, as lofty in tone as some of Gibbon's references to the Code, Pandects, and Institutes of Justinian. So much for the great body of law now in force in the Philippines governing the relations of individuals with each other, as contrasted with the public law dealing with the state and citizen. The Philippine Government Act of July i, 1902, extended to the Filipinos all the guarantees of the Bill of Rights of our own constitution except the right to bear arms and the right of trial by jury. Obviously, it is as yet wise to make the former excep tion. As to the latter well, the jury sys tem, after all, in this enlightened country, is not an unalloyed and perfect delight. This concludes in a general way those legal aspects of the Philippines which are legiti mately entitled to interest the scholarly

lawyer as such. Incidentally the hope has been entertained that should a copy of this paper hereafter fall into the hands of any young American attorney contemplating the Islands as a place to cast his fortunes, it might be helpful. There are few lawyers, if any, in this great country who could have done our "lawgiving" in the Philippines better than did Major Young, and later Governor Ide, and their respective co-laborers. It was not like the work of code-revising under a settled system of jurisprudence. The legislation they successfully worked out, taken as a whole, ought to rank in the annals of juris prudence along with the East Indian Code prepared by Lord Macaulay and others at Calcutta in 1834-1838. But there is one law upon the statute books of the Philippine Islands which ought to be repealed. It permits the Insular Con stabulary, or Rural Police, or other civilian authorities charged with the preservation of public order, when not strong enough to effectually otherwise handle the outlaw bands which infest much of the country and prey upon the inhabitants, to corral the peaceably inclined rural population into the larger towns and keep them there indefinitely, while the peace officers are trying to cope with the bandits. The spirit of the law is to this effect, that the authorities may say to all persons living in a given country or prov ince or territory, even though it be a terri tory covering many miles: "On or before a certain day you must come in and dwell, until further orders, within a given radius, (say within three miles of the center of a given town) upon penalty of being con sidered as public enemies and treated as such." It will be observed that the statute in question, though it restrains people of their liberty, and necessarily causes much depriva tion of property without due process of the law, contains no word looking to suspension of the writ of habeas corpus, or the declaring of martial law.