Case Digest (G.R. No. 2517)
Facts:
On June 02, 1906, the Court resolved the appeal of R. W. Almond, who had been charged in the Philippines with violating the act of Congress of March 3, 1903, entitled “An act to regulate the immigration of aliens into the United States.” The complaint alleged that between October twenty and October thirty, 1904, Almond was master and in charge of the steamship Rubi, which, on or about October twenty-seven, 1904, brought to the Philippine Islands from the British port of Hongkong, China, an alien of East India, Tawas Tahan, afflicted with trachoma, described as a loathsome contagious disease. It further alleged that on or about October twenty-seven, 1904, Almond permitted Tawas Tahan to land at a place and time other than those designated by the immigration officers, and in contravention of their express instructions. In the lower court, Almond was convicted under the immigration statute’s penal provisions. The record, however, was considered sufficient to show that Almond adopte...Case Digest (G.R. No. 2517)
Facts:
R. W. Almond was charged with violating the Act of Congress of March 3, 1903, governing the immigration of aliens into the United States, for acts imputed between October 20 and October 30, 1904 aboard the steamship Rubi, then arriving from Hongkong, China. The complaint alleged that Tawas Tahan, an alien of East India afflicted with trachoma, was permitted to land in the Philippine Islands at a place and time other than that designated by the immigration officers.The trial court convicted Almond, but the record showed evidence supporting Almond’s claim that he adopted due precautions and that any landing occurred without his knowledge or consent.
Issues:
- Whether a conviction could be sustained against R. W. Almond under sections 8 or 19 of the immigration statute when it appeared that he neither willfully nor negligently permitted the alien to land.
- Whether section 18 criminally penalized the ship’s officer or person in charge at all hazards, even absent express or tacit consent to the unlawful landing.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)