Rubi, et al. (Manguianes) v.

The Provincial Board of Mindoro

GR No. L-14078\

Facts: This is an application for habeas corpus in favor of Rubi and other Manguianes of the Province of Mindoro. It
is alleged that the Maguianes are being illegally deprived of their liberty by the provincial officials of that province.
Rubi and his companions are said to be held on the reservation established at Tigbao, Mindoro, against their will, and
one Dabalos is said to be held under the custody of the provincial sheriff in the prison at Calapan for having run away
form the reservation.

The provincial governor of Mindoro issued executive order No. 2 which says:

"Whereas the provincial board, by Resolution No. 25, current series, has selected a site in the sitio of Tigbao on
Naujan Lake for the permanent settlement of Mangyanes in Mindoro.

"Whereas said resolution has been duly approve by the Honorable, the Secretary of the Interior, on February 21,
1917.

"Now, therefore, I, Juan Morente, jr., provincial governor of Mindoro, pursuant to the provisions of section 2145 of the
revised Administrative Code, do hereby direct that all the Mangyans in the townships of Naujan and Pola and the
Mangyans east of the Baco River including those in the districts of Dulangan and Rubi's place in Calapan, to take up
their habitation on the site of Tigbao, Naujan Lake, not later than December 31, 1917.

"Any Mangyan who shall refuse to comply with this order shall upon conviction be imprisoned not exceed in sixty
days, in accordance with section 2759 of the revised Administrative Code."

That the resolution of the provincial board of Mindoro copied in paragraph 1 and the executive order of the governor
of the same province copied in paragraph 3, were necessary measures for the protection of the Mangyanes of
Mindoro as well as the protection of public forests in which they roam, and to introduce civilized customs among
them.

That Rubi and those living in his rancheria have not fixed their dwelling within the reservation of Tigbao and are liable
to be punished in accordance with section 2759 of Act No. 2711.

That the undersigned has not information that Doroteo Dabalos is being detained by the sheriff of Mindoro but if he is
so detained it must be by virtue of the provisions of articles Nos. 2145 and 2759 of Act No. 2711.

Issue: Whether or not the act of the local government of Mindoro is valid

Ruling: Yes. Our attempt at giving a brief history of the Philippines with reference to the so-called non-Christians
has been in vain, if we fail to realize that a consistent governmental policy has been effective in the Philippines from
early days to the present. The idea to unify the people of the Philippines so that they may approach the highest
conception of nationality. If all are to be equal before the law, all must be approximately equal in intelligence. If the
Philippines is to be a rich and powerful country, Mindoro must be populated, and its fertile regions must be
developed. The public policy of the Government of the Philippine Islands is shaped with a view to benefit the Filipino
people as a whole. The Manguianes, in order to fulfill this governmental policy, must be confined for a time, as we
have said, for their own good and the good of the country.

Most cautiously should the power of this court to overrule the judgment of the Philippine Legislature, a coordinate
branch, be exercised. The whole tendency of the best considered case is toward non-interference on the part of the
courts whenever political ideas are the moving consideration. Justice Holmes, in one of the aphorisms for which he is
justly famous, said that "constitutional law, like other mortal contrivances, has to take some chances." (Blinn vs.
Nelson [1911], 222 U.S., 1.) If in the final decision of the many grave questions which this case presents, the courts
must take "a chance," it should be with a view to upholding the law, with a view to the effectuation of the general
governmental policy, and with a view to the court's performing its duty in no narrow and bigoted sense, but with that
broad conception which will make the courts as progressive and effective a force as are the other departments of the
Government.

We are of the opinion that action pursuant to section 2145 of the Administrative Code does not deprive a person of
his liberty without due process of law and does not deny to him the equal protection of the laws, and that confinement
in reservations in accordance with said section does not constitute slavery and involuntary servitude. We are further
of the opinion that section 2145 of the Administrative Code is a legitimate exertion of the police power, somewhat
analogous to the Indian policy of the United States. Section 2145 of the Administrative Code of 1917 is constitutional.

Petitioners are not unlawfully imprisoned or restrained of their liberty. Habeas corpus can, therefore, not issue.