THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. JUAN FELEO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

This
appeal has been brought to reverse a judgment of the Court of First
Instance of the Province of Bulacan, finding the appellant, Juan Feleo,
guilty of the offense of inciting sedition in violation of article 142
of the Revised Penal Code, and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment
for four years, nine months and eleven days, prision correccional,
with the accessory penalties prescribed by law, imposing upon him a
fine of P500, with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and
requiring him to pay the costs.

It appears that on September
29, 1932, the legislative committee on labor held a public meeting in
San Miguel, Bulacan, to hear the complaints and grievances of farmers.
Many people were present at said meeting, and after addresses had been
delivered by the official speakers, Juan Feleo made a talk in the
course of which he used expressions in the Tagalog language
substantially to the following effect:

“My
brothers: Nobody violates the law but he who makes it; and it is
necessary that we should all unite to overthrow that power. A soviet
government is necessary here; Russia is the first country where the
laborers have had their emancipation from oppression, imperialism and
capitalism. It is necessary that all property should be delivered to
the government for its administration, and from this we will see the
redemption of the Filipino people.”

The
proof submitted by the prosecution fully sustains the allegation that
the sentiments contained in the foregoing paragraph were expressed by
the speaker. A demurrer was interposed to the information on the ground
that no offense is charged, but said demurrer was overruled. The action
thus taken was correct. The words used by the accused are clearly
directed to the end of inciting sedition, contrary to the provisions of
article 142 of the Revised Penal Code.

The crime of
sedition, as now punishable in these Islands, is defined in article 139
of said Code. According to that article, one of the various forms of
sedition consists in preventing the Insular Government or any
provincial or municipal government, or any public officer thereof, from
freely exercising its or his functions. The language imputed to the
appellant incites the auditors to the over- throwing of the lawmaking
power; and as the greater includes the less, this language necessarily
involves preventing the Government and public officials from freely
exercising their functions.

It is claimed for the appellant
that the language imputed to him was within the privilege secured by
constitutional guaranties, but we have more than once held that this
contention, in connection with speeches of the character of that now
before us, is untenable. (People vs. Feleo, 57 Phil., 451; People vs. Feleo, G. R. Nos, 36427 and 36428, 57 Phil., 990; People vs. Nabong, 57 Phil., 455; People vs. Evangelista, 57 Phil., 354.)

It will be noted that on January 1, 1932, the Revised Penal Code came
into effect, abrogating section 8 of Act No. 292, as amended, relating
to the offense of sedition. The provisions of this Code are intended as
a codification of the provisions of the earlier law, and there
naturally result certain differences in the wording of the laws. But
there is nothing in the changes introduced in the Code which affects
the law favorably to the appellant in this case.

The penalty
imposed by the trial court is correct, and the judgment appealed from
will be affirmed. So ordered, with costs against the appellant.

Avanceña, C. J., Malcolm, Villa-Real, Abad Santos, Hull, Vickers, Imperial, and Butte, JJ., concur.