IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF ONG CHUAN TO BE ADMITTED A CITIZEN OF THE PHILIPPINES. ONG CHUAN, PETITIONER AND APPELLANT, VS. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, OPPOSITOR AND APPEL…

Appeal taken by Ong Chuan from
the decision of the Court of First Instance of Manila in Civil Case No.
44139 denying his petition for admission as a citizen of the
Philippines on the ground that the evidence did not show that he had a
lucrative trade, profession or lawful occupation; nor that he had
conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the
entire period of his residence in the Philippines; nor that Ambrosio
Villalon, one of his two character witnesses, was a credible witness.

On September 6, 1960, appellant filed a petition for
naturalization with the above-named court alleging: that he, a subject
of Nationalist China, was born on April 13, 1918 in Chingkang, China,
and came to the Philippines in March 1930 on board the SS “Susana”;
that he had lived in the City of Manila ever since; that at the time
when he filed his petition he was residing at 336 Dasmarinas, Manila,
with his wife, Virginia Sy Arriola, and their five children, all of
whom were enrolled in schools recognized by the Government where
Philippine History, Civics and government are taught as part of the
prescribed curriculum; that he was a merchant by profession and derived
a net annual income from his business of P5.000.00, more or less; that
he was able to read and write Tagalog and English; that he believed in
the principles underlying the Philippine Constitution; that he had
conducted himself in a proper and irreproachable manner during the
entire period of his residence in this country in his relations with
the constituted government as well as with the community in which he
lived; that he had mingled socially with the Filipinos and had evinced
a sincere desire to learn and embrace the customs, ideals and
traditions of the Filipinos; that it was his intention in good faith to
become a citizen of the Philippines and to renounce forever his
allegiance to the Nationalist Government of China; that he was not
opposed to organized government or affiliated with any association or
group of persons who uphold and teach doctrines opposing organized
government; neither did he defend or teach the necessity or propriety
of violence, personal assault or assasination for the success and
predominance of men’s ideas; that he was not a polygamist nor a
believer in polygamy, nor was he suffering from any incurable
contagious disease or mental alienation; that he possessed all the
qualifications required under Section 2, and none of the
disqualifications under Section 4, of Commonwealth Act No. 473, as
amended.

Attached to the petition for naturalization was the
joint affidavit of Ambrosio Villalon and Catalino Dionisio, residing at
2994 Tramo, Fasay City, and No. 23 Blumentritt, San Juan, Rizal,
respectively, wherein they stated that they had personally known
appellant for more than fifteen years and that to their knowledge he
had resided in the Philippines continuously for more than 30 years, and
in the City of Manila for more than 15 years immediately preceding the
filing of the petition, and that they had known appellant to possess
all the qualifications necessary to become a citizen of the Philippines
and none of the disqualifications.

After the requisite publication and hearing, the Court, on September 28, 1961, rendered the appealed judgment.

We
find this appeal to be without merit, for we have repeatedly held that
an annual net income of P5,000.00 does not show that the petitioner has
a lucrative business or occupation (Keng Giok vs. Republic, G. R. No.
L-13347, August 31, 1961 and other cases); more particularly in this
case where appellant’s own evidence shows that his income for the years
1957 to 1960 were a little over P5,000.00, P1,400.00, P2,000.00 and
P4,000.00, respectively.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is affirmed. With costs.

Concepcion, C.J., Reyes, J.B.L., Barrera, Regala, Makalintal, Bengzon, Zaldivar, and Sanchez, JJ., concur.