US vs.

Toribio
G.R. No. L-5060

January 26, 1910

Facts:
Luis Toribio was charged for violation of sections 30 and 33 of Act No. 1147, an Act regulating
the registration, branding, and slaughter of large cattle for slaughtering a carabao without
securing a permit from the municipal treasurer of the municipality of Carmen, Bohol. But he
contended that the provisions of Act No. 1147 do not prohibit or penalize the slaughtering of
large cattle without a permit of the municipal treasurer. What the act prohibits is the slaughtering
and killing of large cattle for food or human consumption in a municipal slaughterhouse without
a permit secured from the municipal treasurer. He also added that the municipality of Carmen
has no municipal slaughterhouse, so therefore, the said law is not applicable in his case.
Moreover, it was found out that Toribio applied for a permit to slaughter his carabao but it was
denied on him because the animal was fit for agricultural work. Toribios counsel defended that
the statute is unconstitutional and in violation of section 5 of the Philippine Bill which provides
that "no law shall be enacted which shall deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without
due process of law."
Issue: Whether or not Act. No. 1147, regulating the registration, branding and slaughter of large
cattle, is an undue and unauthorized exercise of police power.
Held:
No. Act No. 1147 is an authorized exercise of police power.
The SC held that the said law is a just and legitimate exercise of the power of the legislature in
order to regulate and restrain the use of the property to prevent the impairment of public rights
and interest of the community. Moreover, in order for the state to be justified of exercising the
police power, the interest of the public must be considered and that the means are reasonably
necessary and not oppressive among individuals. From this, the said law enacted is for the
promotion of the general welfare in the exercise of the sovereign police power with a purpose of
minimizing the crime of cattle stealing which is necessary because of the Philippines condition
from the past. Therefore, this law possessed the requirements for a valid exercise of police
power.

Moreover, the SC also justified that the said statute is not an exercise of the inherent power
of eminent domain because the taking of carabaos is not for the public purpose, and that the
provision of the statute is not a violation of the terms of section 5 of the Philippine Bill.
Therefore, the SC affirmed that Toribio is convicted for the violation of Act No. 1147.