Second. That where, without dispossessing a priest of the Roman Catholic Church by force or fraud, peaceable and actual possession of a church is held by the municipality under a claim of right, or by persons claiming to represent such municipality under a claim of right, the executive has no function except to preserve the status quo; and that should such possession be a violation of the rights of the church, they must be vindicated in a suit in the civil courts. Third. That where a priest of the Roman Catholic Church, while in possession of the parish church, leaves the Roman Catholic communion and retains possession of the church under a claim of right for the municipality or the people of the municipality, however great violation this may be of the rights of the church, it can not be remedied through the executive, but the rights of the church must be asserted and vindicated through a suit in the civil courts. In view of these conclusions, I have not thought it wise to issue a general order, and shall content myself with treating each case as it arises upon the particular circumstances thereof. I have the honor to be, with great respect, sincerely yours, EXHIBIT No. 47. Wм. H. TAFT, Civil Governor. MANILA, P. I., September 7, 1903. SIR: Pursuant to your instructions, I visited the town of Hagonoy, province of Bulacan, on Thursday, the 3d instant, for the purpose of investigating the charges of disturbing religious worship made against certain inhabitants of that town by the Rev. Homer C. Stuntz, presiding elder of the Philippine Islands district of the Methodist Episcopal Church. Briefly stated, the facts in the case are as follows: It appears that the building of the Methodist Chapel at Hagonoy, after many months of active Methodist propaganda, during which considerable feeling was manifested between the opposing church parties, was the occasion for much bitterness and recrimination on the part of the Catholics of the town. The new chapel is situated on the same street as the house of one Domingo Toma la Cruz, the municipal treasurer, and a prominent leader in Catholic Church matters in Hagonoy, Cruz is represented as being particularly annoyed by the proximity of the church of the new sect to his home, and when it was in course of construction is said to have declared that he would never permit the holding of services there. The church was dedicated for worship on Sunday, the 26th of July, and on that day, as well as on every succeeding Sunday since the dedication ceremonies, a bamboo band, played by young men of the town, was stationed in front of the church during the evening services, making hideous noises with their instruments, without regard to time, and rendering the continuance of the services impossible. These facts were fully substantiated by the witnesses examined at the suggestion of Mr. Stuntz. The names of these men are as follows: Pedro Aduna, licensed exhorter; Mariano Madino, Marcelo Estrella, Benedicto Viri, Lorenzo Angeles, and Adriano Felipe, all adherents of the Methodist faith. Toma la Cruz disclaimed all responsibility for the disturbance; declared that the band had never been inside his house, and tried to give the impression that the said band was composed of irresponsible boys, sacristanes, altar boys, and others, and that the disturbance represented the mischief of children rather than the expression of any religious hatred on the part of the full-grown inhabitants of the town. It was afterwards ascertained from the presidente that Cruz had rented his "entresuelo" for the purposes of a musical school. The time of the establishment of this school seemed at first suspiciously coincident with the beginning of the work on the new church. No connection, however, could be established between the pupils of Cruz's musical school and the musicians of the bamboo band, and while there is every indication that Cruz aided and abetted the disturbers, none of the Methodists furnished any proof of this fact. Domingo Tarralba, who was represented in the complaint as the master of the band, denied all connection with it, and said he was in the crowd merely as a spectator. The presidente of Hagonoy, whose name is José Lopez, is a keenly intelligent, capable, and, I think, trustworthy man. He gave his testimony frankly and freely, and admitted that ill feeling was prevalent since the establishment of the new church. No complaint had been made to him, however, or to the justice of the peace, and since no actual breach of the peace had occurred, he had hoped that it would pass away without any necessity for intervention on the part of the town authorities. Cruz, he said, was undoubtedly one of those who felt most bitterly on the subject of the new church, and he did not hesitate to say that he thought he was capable of instigating the disturbances. He attributed the whole trouble, however, to the lincensed exhorter, Pedro Aduna, who he said was a man of bad repute, a professional demagogue and agitator, he was constantly inciting violence by his intemperate characterizations of the Catholics as "image worshippers," "idolators," etc., and by industriously spreading the report that the Methodist Church was the state church of the United States. Aduna had been presidente of the town during the American military régime, and created intense feeling by closing the Catholic cemetery and ordering all the deceased inhabitants of the town to be interred in the cemetery belonging to the municipality. After being removed from his position for cause, he became an evangelist, and lately succeeded in still further intensifying the feeling against him by attempting to bury a non-Catholic in the Catholic cemetery, in violation of the rules of the Catholic Church, and in spite of the protests of the local padre. The presidente is of the opinion that the selection of Aduna to be the local mouthpeice of the Methodists in Hagonoy is the worst possible choice that could have been made, and that this fact has contributed more than any other to the disturbed state of public feeling. The appearance and manners of Aduna are decidedly unprepossessing and corroborate almost in detail the presidente's statements with respect to him. The presidente further stated that his position was very difficult. There are 21,000 Catholics in the town he avers, and about 100 Methodists. Unless an actual breach of the peace occurs, of sufficient gravity to warrant his interference, he fears that any unusual action he might take for the protection of the Protestants might be misunderstood by the rest of his people, and add to rather than allay the excitement. It was explained to the presidente that if there was only one dissenter in Hagonoy, that his right to worship according to his conscience was as sacred as if his opinions were held by the majority of the inhabitants of the town, and that the government looked to him to see that the rights of the minority, no less than those of the majority, were properly respected; he promised to prevent a recurrence of the disturbance by the band, and, if necessary, to station a policeman in front of the church during the hours of service to see that the Methodists were not subjected to further annoyance. It is my opinion that a town ordinance declaring the freedom of religious worship and providing penalties and liabilities for infractions of same, would simplify matters considerably. Such an ordinance would obviate the necessity of appealing to the insular government in cases of this character, at least until local remedies had been exhausted, and each conviction had thereunder, would be a good object lesson in the real meaning of religious liberty. I informed Aduna and the other Methodist workers that when their rights were infringed or their meetings disturbed, it was their duty to file a complaint forthwith with the justice of the peace, and if the result of the trial should prove that justice could not be had in the town, it would then be time for them to appeal their case to a higher court or to make grievances known to the proper authorities. On being asked his opinion of Lopez, Judge Roxas, who was holding court at Malolos, said that Lopez was the most efficient and trustworthy presidente in Bulacan. Everything considered, his town was a model one, and it was the judge's opinion that he might be depended upon to do full justice to all the interests involved so far as his authority extended. While in Malolos, in accordance with the verbal instructions of the executive secretary, I made inquiries as to the complaints against Crisostomo, the provincial fiscal of Bulacan. The gravest and in fact the only charge against Crisostomo seems to be incompetency. When I called at the court of first instance I found that Judge Roxas was practically compelled to take the examination of the witnesses on behalf of the government away from the fiscal, and to put the questions to the witnesses calculated to elicit the information necessary to sustain the complaint. I asked Judge Roxas afterwards about this, and he admitted that it was most distasteful to him, and that he was driven to it merely as an emergency measure. The lawyers were protesting against the practice. By reason of the fiscal's incompetency and the lack of intelligent preparation and presentment half the cases brought by the government would collapse unless he came to the fiscal's aid, thus practically assuming the functions of the prosecuting attorney, Respectfully submitted. Hon. L. R. WILFLEY, RICHARD CAMPBELL. Attorney-General, Manila, P. I. [First indorsement.] OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Respectfully forwarded to the executive secretary for the Philippine Islands. [Second indorsement.] OFFICE OF THE CIVIL GOVERNOR OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Manila, P. I., September 10, 1903. Respectfully referred to Doctor Stuntz, Manila, for his information, with a request that the paper be returned. W. H. TAFT, Civil Governor. [Third indorsement.] No. 114, NOZALEDA, MANILA, P. I. Governor Wм. H. TAFT, Manila, P. I. SIR: I return herewith the report of Mr. Richard Campbell on the disturbance of a religious service in Hagonoy, Bulacan, as requested in your letter or transmission. The inquiry as carried on by Mr. Campbell and reported upon in the communication under reply has been most unsatisfactory, and I ask that the attorney-general be requested to prosecute the offenders. In support of that request permit me to briefly restate the following: During two years and well into the third we have maintained Protestant services regularly in Hagonoy. During all that time our services have been interrupted in minor ways-stones and eggs thrown at the ministers and at the chapel in which the work was being done. Little by little offenders have become more bold, and the outbreak which constituted the offense for which we now ask prosecution was only the culmination of this spirit of bitter hostility. On July 26 last, I dedicated a new chapel built there by the people and all day a band in the house of Señor Cruz, municipal secretary, located immediately across the street from the new chapel kept up its tooting and drumming. As it was the day of town fiesta we made no complaint, but submitted to the annoyance as though it had been unintentional. We were sure that it was not so, for Señor Cruz is a prominent Catholic in Hagonoy, and had threatened repeatedly that he would never permit the Methodists to use their chapel. After the dedication services were interrupted in each instance. On Sunday August 23, however, a mob of two or three score assembled in the street immediately in front of the chapel about the time for evening service and with bamboo instruments, tin cans, bells, and every noise-producing instrument they could find they kept up an incessant din until long past the hour when service could be held. Our Mr. Goodell sent for the police, and the officer who came shrugged his shoulders and declined to interfere. He then proceeded quietly to secure the names of the parties, and with the help of members of the church and congregation succeeded in getting nearly every name. He brought the paper which he and the officers of the church made out in the midst of the din and yelling of this mob, to me, and I transmitted it with a request for investigation and action to the attorney-general the week following the disturbance, with the results already known. Mr. Campbell's report is open to criticism in several particulars: 1. He admits that the disturbance took place as alleged, but suggested no prosecution for the offense! "These facts were fully substantiated by the witnesses examined at the suggestion of Doctor Stuntz." In his interview with the presidente that official stated that "unless a breach of the peace occurs of sufficient gravity to warrant his interference he fears that any unusual action he might take for the protection of the Protestant people might be misunderstood by the rest of his people, etc.' (pp. 3-4). If the offense charged does not constitute "an actual breach of the peace sufficient to warrant interference" on the part of the officials sworn to keep order, and protect all worshippers in their rights of peaceable assemblage for divine worship, I would be unable to suggest what would be regarded as such breach of the peace. He admits the facts as set forth in the charge, and then leaves us to infer that he accepts the view of the presidente that no actual breach of the peace took place. This is unsatisfactory to us as complainants. 2. He accepts, apparently without question, the unsupported denials of parties charged with participation in the mob, while we have more than a score of witnesses, including our Mr. Goodell, who lived in Hagonoy for more than a year, and knows nearly all of the participants by name, who saw them at close range while the dis turbance was being made, and are ready to swear that they did do precisely what is complained of. For instance the report says (p. 2): “Toma la Cruz disclaims all responsibility for the disturbance, declared that the band had never been inside of his house, and tried to give the impression that the said band was composed of irresponsible boys, sacristanes, altar boys, etc." That is precisely what we expected Señor Cruz to say. But what of the statements of all our witnesses? Why was Mr. Campbell so confiding? What did he expect Señor Cruz to say? Did he expect that he would plead guilty? On page 2 of the report Mr. Campbell says that Señor Cruz had "rented his entresuelo for the purposes of a musical school. The time of the establishment of this school seemed at first suspiciously coincident with the beginning of the work on the new church. No connection however could be established between the pupils of Cruz's musical school and the musicians of the bamboo band, and while there is every indication that Cruz aided and abetted the disturbers, none of the Methodists furnish any proof of this fact." The "musical school" is believed by all our people in Hagonoy to be pure fake. It was not until services were opened in the chapel that this band gathered there. They jeered at all comers, calling them "Protestant dogs" and other names yet more vile. It was not a band learning to play music. It was a crowd of town hoodlums set on by their leaders to break up the services. The report says none "of the Methodists furnished any proof" that Señor Cruz "aided and abetted the disturbers," and yet says "there is every indication that he did so." What were these indications? From whom did he learn of them if not from the Methodists? The presidente said it was a laudable effort on the part of Señor Cruz to encourage musical studies that led to the use of a room immediately in front of the chapel for the performance on tin cans and bamboo instruments, and to perform only at such times as synchronized with the hours of divine service in the chapel. Señor Cruz denied any intent or effort to disturb the services. Where did Mr. Campbell find his "indications" if not among witnesses cited by us from the Methodists? If he had inquired about with any degree of diligence he could have found Methodists by the dozen who would have identified Señor Cruz with the disturbance of August 23, and with that of July 25, and with others of which no complaint was ever made, nor any notice taken. 3. The report further states that Pedro Aduna, one of our local preachers, is "a professional demagogue and agitator, constantly inciting to violence, etc." (p. 3, top, etc.). When it is known that Señor Aduna is far and away the best educated man in the place, and is being talked of as an opposition candidate for the presidente at the next election, some light may be thrown on the statements of the present incumbent of that office who has a laudable ambition to be reelected. Politics are not calculated to give men favorable opinions of those who oppose their plans and policies. It is not true that Señor Aduna was removed from his position as presidente for cause. He resigned. He was immediately made justice of the peace, and only succeeded in getting the consent of the authorities to give up that position after he had resigned at least three times. And, besides, what has the choice of Señor Aduna, or of any other man as a worker in our church, to do with the specific charge that on Sunday evening, August 23, a public and persistent and successful effort was made by parties known and named to break up divine services held in conformity with the law? It is a matter for surprise that a lawyer, if Mr. Campbell is a lawyer, should have permitted irrelevant matter of such a character to have any kind of weight in determining whether the offenders should or should not have been punished. 4. It is all very well for Mr. Campbell to secure a promise from the presidente that he would provide police protection in future; but that is his duty, and has been his duty from the beginning. And such future protection, while past offenders go unpunished, is certain to be ineffectual. It is all very well for the author of the report to instruct the Methodists how to proceed in future, but what of the disturbance of which we make definite and detailed complaint? For this and other reasons the report is unsatisfactory, and I respectfully ask that the attorney-general be requested to prosecute the offenders named in my original complaint. Yours, truly, HOMER C. STUNTZ, Presiding Elder, Methodist Episcopal Church, Philippine Islands. [Fourth indorsement.] OFFICE OF THE CIVIL GOVERNOR OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Respectfully referred to the attorney-general, inviting attention to the within note of Doctor Stuntz. Is there any provision in the Spanish law for the prosecution of such an offense as that described in the within? WM. H. TAFT, Civil Governor. [Fifth indorsement.] OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, Manila, October 12, 1903. Respectfully returned to the civil governor inviting attention to the inclosed statement of Mr. Richard Campbell. L. R. WILFLEY, Attorney-General. [Inclosure to fifth indorsement.] DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, SIR: With respect to the present condition of the Spanish law in relation to offenses against religious worship, I have the honor to state that the Spanish Penal Code, in providing penalties and liabilities for offenses against religion, has in contemplation only offenses against the religion of the State. Section 3 of chapter 2 of Book 2 of said code, which treats of "Crimes in connection with religion and worship" makes no provision for the punishment of offenses against any form of religious worship except those directed against the Catholic or state religion. So clear is it that no other form of religion was contemplated or tolerated, that article 226 of said code provides in terms that "Those who shall publicly perform acts of propaganda, preaching, or other cermonies which are not those of the religion of the state, shall incur the penalty of prisión correccional in its minimum degree.' With the passing of the Spanish sovereignty, all provisions of law relating to a state religion were swept away, and it is assumed that the provisions of section 3 of chapter 2 of Book 2 of the penal code, are therefore repealed. The only remaining provision of the penal code, which might be held to apply to the case in point, is article 571, which provides that "The following shall be punished with the penalty of arrest of from one to ten days, and a fine of from 15 to 125 pesetas:" "1. Those who shall disturb any act of a religious character in any manner not foreseen in section 3, chapter 2 of Book 2 of this code." It will be seen that the section cited supra is based upon the chapter which is hereinbefore held to be repealed, and therefore that the words "any act of a religious character" were meant to apply to the religion of the state. It seems certain, therefore, that to hold that this section applies to the case in point would be to give the law an interpretation never intended or contemplated by the Spanish law-making body. Whether this view shall obtain, or whether it may be held that the penal code has been so amended by the organic law as to be susceptible of application to the case in point, is open to question. I am of the opinion, however, that the latter is an extremely doubtful interpretation. It is respectfully maintained that the within report relating to religious disturbances in Hagonoy is a fair and accurate presentment of the facts in the case as the writer found them. The allegations of Doctor Stuntz as to the actual disturbance were substantially sustained by the members of the local Methodist church examined at his suggestion, and also by the presidente of the town. Doctor Stuntz's witnesses failed, however, to sustain his charges against La Cruz and others, and in fact the exhorter, Aduna, and the other Methodist witnesses specifically denied any knowledge of La Cruz's connection with the disturbances. Indeed, the only confirmation of Doctor Stuntz's charges against La Cruz developed during the inquiry was had from the presidente, who stated that La Cruz was a particularly bitter opponent of Methodism, and that, while he was unable to connect him directly with the occurrence complained of, not having been to the vicinity at the time, he was of the opinion that La Cruz was one of the prime movers in causing the trouble. Considering the fact that La Cruz is municipal treasurer and apparently a man of influence in Hagonoy, and that Doctor Stuntz's witnesses had practically acquitted the former of all responsibility in connection with the disturbances, the statement of the presidente as to Cruz's real connection with the affair, which was made freely and frankly, made a favorable impression on the writer, and he was thereafter inclined to accept the presidente's views as to the general situation. The witnesses were questioned closely as to the prevalence of ill feeling in the town against Protestants, if their meetings had ever been disturbed previous to the building of the church, and if they had ever been threatened, persecuted, or annoyed because of their religion. The majority testified that they knew of no ill feeling against them on religious grounds, that their meetings had never been interrupted subsequent to the building |