The first complaint filed against the defendant, in the

Court of First Instance of Cebu, stated that he "carried,

kept, possessed and had in his possession and control, 96
kilogrammes of opium," and that "he had been surprised in
the act of selling 1,000 pesos worth of prepared opium."
The defense presented a demurrer based on two
grounds, the second of which was that more than one crime
[No. 5887. December 16, 1910.]
was charged in the complaint. The demurrer was
sustained, as the court f ound that the complaint contained
THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff and appellee, vs. LOOK two charges, one, for the unlawful possession of opium, and
CHAW (alias LUK CHIU), defendant and appellant. the other, f or the unlawf ul sale of opium, and, in
consequence of that ruling, it ordered that the fiscal should
SHIPS AND SHIPPING; OPIUM IN TRANSIT; LANDING separate one charge f rom the other and file a complaint for
OF CONTRABAND GOODS; JURISDICTION.—Although the each violation; this, the fiscal did, and this cause concerns
mere possession of an article of prohibited use in the Philippine only the unlawf ul possession of opium. It is registered as
Islands, aboard a foreign vessel in transit, in any local port, No. 375, in the Court of First Instance of Cebu, and as No.
does not, as a general rule, constitute a crime triable by the 5887 on the general docket of this court.
courts of the Islands, such vessel being considered as an The facts of the case are contained in the following
extension of its own nationality, the same rule does not apply finding of the trial court:
when the article, the use of which is prohibited in the Islands, "The evidence, it says, shows that between 11 and 12
is landed from the vessel upon Philippine soil; in such a case an o'clock a. m. on the 18th of the present month (stated as
open violation of the laws of the August 19, 1909), several persons, among them Messrs.
Jacks and Milliron, chief of the department of the port of
574 Cebu and internal-revenue agent of Cebu, respectively,
went aboard the steamship Erroll to inspect and search its
cargo,

574 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED 575

United States vs. Look Chaw.

VOL. 18, DECEMBER 16, 1910 575
land is committed, with respect to which, as it is a violation of the United States vs. Look Chaw.
penal law in force at the place of the commission of the crime, no
court other than that established in the said place has jurisdiction and found, first in a cabin near the saloon, one sack
of the offense, in the absence of an agreement under an (Exhibit A) and afterwards in the hold, another sack
international treaty. (Exhibit B). The sack referred to as Exhibit A contained 49
cans of opium, and the other, Exhibit B, the larger sack,
APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of also contained several cans of the same substance. The
Cebu. Paredes, J. hold, in which the sack mentioned in Exhibit B was found,
The facts are stated in the opinion of the court. was under the defendant's control, who, moreover, freely
Thos. D. Aitken, for appellant. and of his own will and accord admitted that this sack, as
Attorney-General Villamor, for appellee. well as the other referred to in Exhibit B and found in the
cabin, belonged to him. The said defendant also stated,
ARELLANO, C. J.: freely and voluntarily, that he had bought these sacks of
opium in Hongkong with the intention of selling them as The defense moved that this testimony be rejected, on
contraband in Mexico or Vera Cruz, and that, as his hold the ground of its being hearsay evidence, and the court only
had already been searched several times for opium, he ordered that the part thereof "that there was more opium
ordered two other Chinamen to keep the sack. Exhibit A." on board the vessel" be stricken out.
It is to be taken into account that the two sacks of The defense, to abbreviate proceedings, admitted that
opium, designated as Exhibits A and B, properly constitute the receptacles mentioned as Exhibits A, B, and C,
the corpus delicti. Moreover, another lot of four cans of contained opium and were found on board the steamship
opium, marked, as Exhibit C, was the subject matter of Erroll, a vessel of English nationality, and that it was true
investigation at the trial, and with respect to which the that the defendant stated that these sacks of opium were
chief of the department of the port of Cebu testified that his and that he had them in his possession.
they were found in the part of the ship where the firemen According to the testimony of the internal-revenue
habitually sleep, and that they were delivered to the first agent, the defendant stated to him, in the presence of the
officer of the ship to be returned to the said firemen after provincial fiscal, of a Chinese interpreter (who afterwards
the vessel should have left the Philippines, because the was not needed, because the defendant spoke English), the
firemen and crew of foreign vessels, pursuant to the warden of the jail, and four guards, that the opium -seized
instructions he had from the Manila custom-house, were in the vessel had been bought by him in Hongkong, at three
permitted to retain certain amounts of opium, always pesos for each round can and five pesos for each one of the
provided it should not be taken ashore. others, for the purpose of selling it, as contraband, in
And, finally, another can of opium, marked "Exhibit D," Mexico and Puerto de Vera Cruz; that on the 15th the
is also corpus delicti and important as evidence in this vessel arrived at Cebu, and on the same day he sold opium;
cause. With regard to this the internal-revenue agent that he had tried to sell opium for P16 a can; that he had a
testified as follows: contract to sell an amount of the value of about P500; that
"FISCAL. What is it? the opium found in the room of the other two Chinamen
"WlTNESS. It is a can of opium which was bought from prosecuted in another cause, was his, and that he had left
the defendant by a secret-service agent and taken to the it in their stateroom to avoid its being found in his room,
office of the governor to prove that the accused had opium which had already been searched many times; and that,
in his possession to sell." according to
576 577

576 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED VOL. 18, DECEMBER 16, 1910 577
United States vs. Look Chaw. United States vs. Look Chaw.

On motion by the def ense, the court ruled that this answer the defendant, the contents of the large sack was 80 cans of
might be stricken out "because it refers to a sale." But, with opium, and of the small one, 49, and the total number, 129.
respect to this answer, the chief of the department of It was established that the steamship Erroll was of
customs had already given this testimony, to wit: English nationality, that it came from Hongkong, and that
"FISCAL. Who asked you to search the vessel? it was bound for Mexico, via the call ports of Manila and
"WITNESS. The internal-revenue agent came to my Cebu.
office and said that a party brought him a sample of opium The defense moved for a dismissal of the case, on the
and that the same party knew that there was more opium grounds that the court had no jurisdiction to try the same
on board the steamer, and the agent asked that the vessel and the facts concerned therein did not constitute a crime.
be searched." The fiscal, at the conclusion of his argument, asked that
the maximum penalty of the law be imposed upon the def was considerable, it does not appear that, on such account,
endant, in view of the considerable amount of opium seized. the two penalties fixed by the law on the subject, should be
The court ruled that it did not lack jurisdiction, inasmuch imposed in the maximum degree.
as the crime had been committed within its district, on the Therefore, reducing the imprisonment and the fine
wharf of Cebu. imposed to six months and P1,000, respectively, we affirm
The court sentenced the def endant to five years' in all other respects the judgment appealed from, with the
imprisonment, to pay a fine of P10,000, with additional costs of this instance against the appellant. So ordered.
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, though not
to exceed one third of the principal penalty, and to the Torres, Mapa, Johnson, Carson, Moreland, and Trent,
payment of the costs. It further ordered the confiscation, in JJ., concur.
favor of the Insular Government, of the exhibits presented
Judgment modified; penalty reduced.
in the case, and that, in the event of an appeal being taken
or a bond given, or when the sentence should have been ___________
served, the defendant be not released from custody, but
turned over to the customs authorities for the purpose of
the fulfillment of the existing laws on immigration.
From this judgment, the defendant appealed to this
court.
The appeal having been heard, together with the
allegations made therein by the parties, it is f ound: That, © Copyright 2020 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.
although the mere possession of a thing of prohibited use in
these Islands, aboard a foreign vessel in transit, in any of
their ports, does not, as a general rule, constitute a crime
triable by the courts of this country, on account of such
vessel being considered as an extension of its own
nationality, the same rule does not apply when the article,
whose use is

578

578 PHILIPPINE REPORTS ANNOTATED

United States vs. Balmori and Apostol.

prohibited within the Philippine Islands, in the present

case a can of opium, is landed from the vessel upon
Philippine soil, thus committing an open violation of the
laws of the land, with respect to which, as it is a violation
of the penal law in force at the place of the commission of
the crime, only the court established in the said place itself
has competent jurisdiction, in the absence of an agreement
under an international treaty.
It is also found: That, even admitting that the quantity
of the drug seized, the subject matter of the present case,