This action was commenced in the Court of First Instance of the  city  of Manila,  for the purpose of  deporting from the  Philippine  Islands the defendant, who is a Chinese person.  The complaint was presented in said court by Sandalio Rodriguez, who described himself as "un oficial debida autorizado por el departamento de  inmigraci6n  de la Aduana de Manila, Islas Filipinas."

Upon said complaint  a warrant of arrest was issued and the defendant was duly arrested and brought before the court.   At the time fixed for the the attorney for the defendant presented  a motion to quash  the  warrant of arrest,  for the reason that it was issued upon an insufficient affidavit complaint.  The  attorney for the  defendant alleged that under the provisions of the Act of Congress  of March 3, 1901 (section  3) no warrant of arrest for a violation of the Chinese Exclusion Law could be issued,  except upon the sworn complaint of the United States district attorney, the assistant United States district attorney, the collector, collector or inspector of customs, the immigration inspector, the United marshal  or  United States deputy marshal or the Chinese inspector, the issuing of such warrant of arrest shall first be  approved  or request writing by the United States district attorney of the district in which is issued.  This motion to quash was granted by the Honorable Charles S. Lobingier, judge.  From that decision, the Attorney-General appealed to court.

The appellant insists that Act No. 702 of the Philippine Commission  con the procedure to be adopted  in the deportation of Chinese laborers who are found  in the Philippine Islands without the certificate required  b Act No.  702.  In reading said Act  No. 702,  it will be noted that there is no provision whatever relating to the persons who may p the sworn complaint provided for in said Act of Congress of March 3, 1901.  Said Act No. 702 provides that any Chinese person found in the Philippine Islands without the certificate of registration required by the time provided for has elapsed, "may be arrested, upon a warrant issued by the Court of First Instance of the province or by the justices court municipality, returnable before said Court of First Instance, by any customs official,  police, Constabulary  or  other peace officer of the Philippine Islands."  While this Act No. 702 provides who may make the arrest, contains  no  provision whatever relating to  the person who may make the sworn complaint upon which the warrant of arrest may be issued.

In view  of the  positive  provisions above quoted of the Act of Congress of March 3, 1901, and in view of the fact that Act No. 702 makes no provision relating to the sworn complaint upon  which the  warrant of arrest may issue, and  holding as we do that a complaint must be presented,  we are  of  the opinion that the provisions of said Act of Congress must be followed with reference to the persons who may present such sworn complaint to the proper court, upon which the warrant of arrest may A number of said officers mentioned  in said Act of Congress exist, in n in the Philippine Islands.  Congress evidently had a purpose in providing certain persons only should make the sworn complaint upon which  Chinese persons might be arrested for deportation.  This purpose, as was suggest by the lower court, was  evidently to prevent great abuses in the form o blackmail, etc., which might creep into the procedure and fail of detect

It may be argued that the officials, who are required to make the sworn complaint mentioned in the said Act of Congress (March 3, 1901), are not found in the Philippine Islands.  We have certain officials, however, in Philippine Islands who bear the same relation to the Government of the Philippine Islands which the officers mentioned in the said Act bear to Government of the United States.  Certainly it was not the intention of Congress, when it provided by the Act of April 29,1902, that the Philipp Legislature should provide the procedure for the deportation of Chinese persons, to permit such  Legislature to disregard certain positive  prov law relating to the procedure, in the same class of cases, in the United Neither are we of the opinion that the Philippine Legislature in  adoption No. 702 intended to  allow warrants of arrest to issue without  the presentation of a  sworn  complaint  by some competent person.  In the present case the said  Sandalio Rodriguez, as appears from the record, m a preliminary examination into the rights of the defendant, before the complaint was presented.  In that preliminary examination it appears that was a clerk in the immigration division of the Bureau of Customs.  We are the opinion, after a careful consideration  of the provisions of the Act Congress of March 3, 1901, that  Sandalio Rodriguez was  not authorized present the complaint in the present case. Congress provided that  certain persons only, holding a certain relation to the Government, should be permitted to make the  sworn complaint.   We do not believe  that  the Congress of the United States intended to place a greater impediment to due administration of the Immigration Laws in  the United States than was intended to be imposed upon the administration of the same laws in the Philippine Islands.   Neither do we believe that the Philippine Legislature, in passing Act 702, intended that the warrant of arrest should be issued ex in accordance with the Act of Congress then in force and expressly extended to the Philippine Islands.

By the Act of Congress of April 29, 1902, as amended and reenacted by section  5 of the Act of April 27, 1904 (32 Statutes at Large, part 1, p 33 Statutes at Large, pp. 394-428), all laws  in force on said date, regulating, suspending or prohibiting  the coming of Chinese persons or persons of Chinese descent into the United States, and the residence of persons therein, including sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 13 and 14 of Congress of September 13,  1888, were re-enacted, extended, and continued without modification, limitation, or condition;  and  said laws were also the same Act, extended and made applicable to the island territory under the jurisdiction of the United States.

In view of the positive requirements  of said Act of Congress (Act of Ma 3, 1901,  sec. 3),  relating to the only persons who can make the sworn complaint in cases like the present, and the absence of any provision whatever in said Act No. 702, we are of the opinion that the complaint here must be presented by officers of the Philippine Government bearing same  relation to  said Government which  the officers mentioned in said of Congress bear to the United States Government.

For the foregoing reasons we are Of the  opinion  and so hold  that the judgment of the court below should be affirmed, and it is so ordered.

Arellano,  C. J.,  Torres, Mapa,  Carson, Moreland,  and Trent, JJ., concur.