“Not even the abhorrent species of traffic apparently carried on by the accused justifies a sentence not authorized by law.”
More important still, the court held that:—
“The judge below quotes the Bill of Rights of the Philippines contained in the Act of Congress of July 1, 1902, declaring that ‘neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist in said Islands.’ This constitutional provision is self-acting whenever the nature of a case permits and any law or contract providing for the servitude of a person against his will is forbidden and is void. For two obvious reasons, however, it fails to reach the facts before us:—
“First. The employment or custody of a minor with the consent or sufferance of the parents or guardian, although against the child’s own will, cannot be considered involuntary servitude.
“Second. We are dealing not with a civil remedy but with a criminal charge, in relation to which the Bill of Rights defines no crime and provides no punishment. Its effects cannot be carried into the realm of criminal law without an act of the legislature,”
and also that:—
“To sum up this case, there is no proof of slavery or even of involuntary servitude, inasmuch as it has not been clearly shown that the child has been disposed of against the will of her grandmother or has been taken altogether out of her control. If the facts in this respect be interpreted otherwise, there is no law applicable here, either of the United States or of the Archipelago, punishing slavery as a crime.”
In view of the facts above cited the necessity for legislation seemed obvious.
The commission in its capacity as sole legislative body for the territory inhabited by Moros or other non-Christian tribes might have passed an act prohibiting and penalizing slavery, involuntary servitude and peonage in that territory; but such an act unless supplemented by a similar one applicable to the neighbouring Filipino territory where most of the slaves are actually held would obviously have been ineffective, while the desirability of having uniform legislation throughout the Philippines was evident.
The Philippine Assembly was about to meet for the first time. The work of drafting a proper bill was duly provided for and I am sure that no member of the commission for a moment entertained the belief that there would be any difficulty in securing the concurrence of the assembly in the passage of a reasonable act prohibiting and penalizing slavery, involuntary servitude, peonage and the sale and purchase of human beings. The gentleman charged with drafting the bill encountered difficulty in so framing it that it would accomplish the desired end without unduly interfering with the rights of parents over their children. Long delay ensued.