This is an original action brought in this court by virtue of the provisions of Act No. 1370.  It is in all respects similar to the case of The Roman Catholic Church vs. The Municipalities of the Province of Tarlac.^[1]

[The formal part of the judgment is omitted.]

The plaintiffs in tins action seek to recover the possession of a building in that part, of the  pueblo of Iloilo which was formerly the pueblo of Jaro, and known as the Hospital of Jaro, The evidence shows that this building was constructed under the direction of the Roman Catholic bishop of Jaro and was used, up to the time of the revolution, as a hospital and  that it is now  in the possession of the municipality.  Section 9 of Act No. 1370, under which this action is brought, provides as follows:

"The Supreme Court of the Philippine Islands  is also given original jurisdiction to hear and  determine  all actions involving the title to any hospital, asylum, charitable institution,  or other property of any  description whatsoever, or the ownership, right of administration or  possession thereof which may be brought by the Government of the Philippine Islands  against the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church  or any  archbishop,  bishop, priest or other lawful representative thereof, or which may be brought by such archbishop, bishop, priest, or other lawful representative of the Roman Catholic Apostolic Church  against the Government of the  Philippine Islands; and the procedure as set forth in the  preceding sections hereof shall  be followed, and the provisions of this act shall in all respects apply to such actions."

The building herein in controversy is not a church, convent, or cemetery and is not property used in connection with a church, convent, or cemetery.  We, therefore, have no jurisdiction to make any  resolution in regard to the ownership  thereof  unless  such jurisdiction is given by section 9 above quoted.  But that section says that this court has jurisdiction in reference to  such buildings only in controversies between the Government of the Philippine Islands and the Roman Catholic Church.  This is not such a controversy and the Government  of the Philippine Islands is not  a party to  this  action.  It is a controversy between the Roman Catholic  Church on one side and the municipality  of Iloilo on the other.  We therefore have no jurisdiction to make any resolution in regard to this building and  as to the same the action is dismissed.

The plaintiffs claim the right to recover from the municipality  of  Passi  the cemetery situated  in  the  barrio of San Enrique of that pueblo.  The evidence shows, however, that the plaintiffs, and not the municipality, are now in  the possession thereof, and that the only acts which the municipality  has done  in reference thereto  have been to place it in  its  inventory and to collect foes for the interment of bodies therein.  These acts do not constitute an unlawful' taking possession of the cemetery and  it is  therefore,  adjudged and decreed  that the municipality  of  Passi  be acquitted of the complaint, without costs.

So  ordered.

Arellano, C. J.,  Torres, Mapa, and Tracey, JJ., concur,
Johnson and Carson, JJ., concur in the result,

---

^[1] 9 Phil. Rep., 450.