This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of  the Fourteenth  Judicial District, sitting  at Jolo, discharging the defendant and appellee from  custody under a  complaint filed by the acting collector of customs for the port  of Jolo.   The prayer of the complaint is that the defendant be deported on  the ground that he is a Chinese laborer, found in the municipality of Jolo, Philippine Islands, unprovided with the certificate of registration prescribed for Chinese laborers  under the provisions of Act No. 702 of the Philippine Commission.

The undisputed facts as disclosed by the record are that the defendant is a Chinese person; that some time in 1902 or 1903 he entered the Philippine Islands without the consent or knowledge of the immigration officers;  that at that time he was a laborer, and that he continued to  be a laborer in the Philippine Islands until the month of January, 1907; that he failed to procure the certificate of registration prescribed for all Chinese persons by section 6 of Act No. 702 in the time limited therein  during which such certificates might be procured; that he offered no sufficient or satisfactory excuse for his  failure so  to do; and that he continued in the Philippine Islands down to the date of his arrest in these proceedings on or about the 23d day of September, 1909.

The only question of fact as to which there is any real dispute is defendant's allegation that from some time about the 1st  of  January, 1907, down  to the date of his arrest he was not employed as a laborer, and was in fact engaged in buying and selling merchandise at a fixed place of business, which business was conducted in his own name.

The evidence  submitted by  the defendant  in support  of his  allegations in this regard is not wholly  satisfactory either as to quantity or quality, but we do not deem it necessary to review  the findings of the trial court sustaining defendant's contention,  because  we are of opinion  that granting the truth of all the facts  relied upon by the defendant, the provisions of the Chinese Immigration Laws imposed upon the court below the imperative duty of causing him to be deported.

The precise question upon which the case-turns, as raised by the facts relied  upon  by the  defendant  himself,  is whether an  unregistered Chinese laborer who has made an unlawful entry into these Islands and has taken up his residence and remained therein as a laborer for two or three years thereafter, is subject to deportation in  the event that he changes his occupation from that of a  laborer to that of a  member of one  of the privileged classes before an order of deportation is entered against him.

On April 14,  1899, by Circular No. 13, Division of Customs and Insular Affairs, the Secretary of  War declared the  laws and regulations governing immigration  to  the United States to  be  in effect in the territory under  the government of the military forces of the United States, and directed collectors of  customs to enforce said laws and regulations until the establishment  of immigration stations in said territory, and that said circular was  published, for the information  of all affected thereby, by the military governor of the Philippine Islands on May 30, 1899, in Circular No. 6, series of  1899.  Thereafter Congress passed the Act of April 29, 1902, entitled "An Act. to prohibit the coming into and to regulate the residence within  the United States, its Territories, and all territory under its jurisdiction, and the District of Columbia, of Chinese and persons of Chinese descent," which  Act provides in section 1 as  follows:

"That all laws now in  force prohibiting and regulating the coming of Chinese persons and persons of Chinese descent into the  United States,  and  the residence of such persons therein, including sections  five, six,  seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, thirteen, and fourteen of the Act entitled 'An Act to prohibit the coming of Chinese laborers into the United  States,'  approved September  thirteenth,  eighteen hundred and eighty-eight, be, and the same are hereby, re-enacted, extended, and continued so far as the same are not inconsistent with  treaty  obligations,  until otherwise provided by law,  and said laws shall also apply to the  island territory under the jurisdiction of the United States, and prohibit the immigration  of Chinese laborers, not citizens of the United States, from such island territory  to  the mainland territory of the United States, whether in such island territory  at the time of cession or not, and from one portion of the island  territory of the United States to another portion  of said island territory; Provided, however, That said laws shall not apply to the transit of Chinese laborers from one island  to another island of the same group; and any islands within the jurisdiction of any State or the District of Alaska shall be considered a part of  the mainland under this section."

Section 4 of said Act provides as follows:

"'That it shall be the  duty of every  Chinese laborer, other than  a citizen,  rightfully in and entitled to remain in any of the insular territory of the United States  (Hawaii excepted) at the time of the passage of this  Act, to obtain within one year thereafter a certificate of residence in the insular territory wherein he resides, which certificate shall entitle him to residence therein, and upon failure to obtain such certificate as herein  provided  he shall be deported from such insular territory; and  the Philippine Commission is authorized and required to make all regulations and provisions necessary for the enforcement of this section in the Philippine Islands, including the form and substance of the certificate of residence so that the  same shall clearly  and  sufficiently identify the  holder thereof and enable officials to prevent fraud in the transfer of the same: Provided, however, That  if said Philippine Commission shall find that it is impossible to complete the registration herein provided for within one  year  from the passage of this Act, said  Commission is hereby  authorized and empowered to extend the  time for  such registration  for a further period not exceeding one year."

Pursuant to the authority conferred by Congress in said section 4, the  Philippine Commission, on March 27, 1903, passed Act No. 702, entitled "An Act to regulate the registration of Chinese persons in the Philippine Archipelago, and to carry into effect and enforce the provisions of section four of the Act of Congress approved  April twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred  and  two,  entitled 'An  Act  to prohibit the coming into  and  to  regulate  the residence within the United States,  its Territories, and all territory under its jurisdiction,  and the  District of  Columbia  of Chinese persons and persons of Chinese descent.'"  In section 3 of said Act it is  provided as follows:

"Each certificate of registration shall contain the name, age, date, and place of birth, registry of birth, if any, local residence, occupation, and photograph of the person therein described, and such other data in respect to him as shall be prescribed  by  the  Insular  Collector  of  Customs,  and shall be issued by  the proper officer upon payment to him of a fee of fifty cents United States  currency, said fee  to be accompanied by a true photograph of the applicant  in triplicate  to the satisfaction of such officer."

Section 5 of  said Act provides as follows:

"Every Chinese person having a right to be and remain in the Philippine  Islands  shall  obtain the  certificate  of registration specified in section three of this Act as evidence of such right, shall pay the fee and furnish his photograph in triplicate as in said section prescribed; and every Chinese person found without such certificate within the Philippine Islands after the expiration of the time limited by law for registration shall be presumed,  in the absence of satisfactory proof to the contrary, to be a Chinese laborer and shall be subject to deportation as provided in section four of this Act.  Every Chinese person shall, on demand of any customs  official, police, Constabulary, or other  peace officer, exhibit his certificate and  on his refusal to do so may be arrested and tried as provided in section four of this Act."

Said section 4,  above-mentioned, provides  in  part as follows:

"Any Chinese laborer within the  limits of the Philippine Islands who shall neglect, fail, or refuse to  obtain within the time prescribed by section four of the Act of Congress of the United States, referred to in section  one of this Act, the certificate of  registration  by this  Act provided to be issued, and who shall be found within the Philippine Islands without  such  certificate of registration after  such time has elapsed,  may  be arrested upon warrant  issued by the Court of First Instance of the province or  by the  justice's court  of the municipality returnable before  said Court of First Instance, by any customs official, police,  Constabulary, or other peace officer of the Philippine Islands and brought before any judge of a Court of First Instance in the Islands, whose duty it shall be to order that such  Chinese  laborer be deported  from the  Philippine Islands,  either to China or the country from whence he came, unless he shall affirmatively establish clearly  and to  the satisfaction  of such judge, by at  least one credible witness  other  than Chinese, that although lawfully  in  the  Philippine  Islands  at  and ever since the passage of this Act  he  has  been unable by reason of accident, sickness, or other unavoidable cause to procure the certificate  within the time  prescribed  by law, in which  case the  court  shall order and adjudge  that he procure the proper certificate within a reasonable time and such Chinese  laborer shall  bear and pay the costs of the proceeding: Provided,  however,  That any  Chinese  laborer failing for any reason  to  secure the  certificate required under  this law within two years from  the  date of its passage shall be deported from the Islands.  If it appears that such Chinese laborer had procured a certificate in due time but that the  same  has been lost or destroyed,  he shall be allowed a reasonable time to procure a  duplicate from the Insular Collector of Customs or from the  officer granting the original certificate, and upon  the  production  of such duplicate such Chinese  laborer shall  be discharged from custody upon payment of costs."

Section 12 of said Act No. 702 (taken from sec. 2 of the Act of Congress of November 3,  1893,  amending the Act of May 5, 1892, entitled  "An Act to prohibit the coming of Chinese into the United States") provided as follows:

"The word 'laborer' or 'laborers' wherever used in this Act shall be construed to mean both skilled and unskilled manual laborers, including Chinese laundrymen and  Chinese employed in mining, fishing, huckstering, peddling, or taking, drying or otherwise  preserving shell or other fish for home consumption or exportation.

"The term 'merchant' as employed in this Act signifies a  person engaged in buying and selling merchandise  at a fixed place of business, which business is conducted in his name,  and who during the time he claims to be engaged as a  merchant does not  engage in the  performance  of any manual labor except such as  is necessary in the conduct of his business as such merchant.  The definition of 'laborer' and 'merchant' set out in this section shall receive the same construction  as that given to it by the  Federal  courts of the United States and the rulings and regulations of the Treasury Department of the United States."

The  manifest purpose and object of all this  legislation was to make it unlawful for any Chinese laborer to enter the Philippine Islands or to remain there in the  event that he does in fact unlawfully gain an entry; and  to subject such persons to deportation,  without unnecessarily molesting those Chinese persons, including laborers,  who  were lawfully  in  the Philippine Islands at  the  time  when the Chinese Immigration Laws of the United States were extended to the Islands, and whose  right to be and remain there is not questioned.

To secure these ends a system of registration was provided  whereby every  Chinese person,  including Chinese laborers, "having a right to be and remain in the Philippine Islands" could obtain a certificate of registration, the possession of which would serve as a shield against arrest on a charge  of  being  in the country  unlawfully; while  the failure by a  Chinese laborer, not a citizen of the United States, to obtain such  a  certificate within the time prescribed by law made such laborer subject to deportation, whether he originally had or had not a right to be and remain in the Islands,  unless he  affirmatively established that by reason of accident,  sickness, or other  unavoidable cause  he  was unable to procure one, and further that he was lawfully in the Philippine Islands at and ever since the date of the passage of the Registration Act.

The facts relied upon by defendant himself disclose that he was and continued to be a Chinese laborer in  the Philippine  Islands long after  the  registration period  expired; that he did not  secure  the prescribed certificate; that he had  no sufficient reason for his failure to do so;  and that he was not lawfully in  the Philippine Islands at  the time of the  passage of  the  Chinese  Registration  Act.  Manifestly, therefore, his admitted residence within the Islands as a laborer after the registration period has elapsed subjected him to  deportation, and when he was found without his certificate and  brought before the proper  court and these facts established it was the duty of that court to order his deportation in compliance with the express provisions of the statute.

Counsel  for the appellee contends that since the defendant was a  merchant in fact and not a laborer at  the time when he was arrested the deportation provisions of the law are not applicable to him.   But under the letter of the law (sec. 4, Act No.  702) it is the duty of the court  to order the deportation of any Chinese laborer who fails to obtain the required  certificate, and who is found in the Islands after the registration period has expired, and no exception is made therein  jn  favor of  such persons because  of a change  of status after they have become subject to deportation.  To construe the statute so  as to inject  such an exception into its provisions would be in violation  not only of the letter of the law but also of its spirit  and intent since it manifestly seeks to prohibit Chinese laborers from entering the Islands, to render such  entry  unlawful,  and to make such persons subject to  deportation in the event that they in fact gain an unlawful entry and take  up their residence in the  Islands; and to deny the right of lawful entry to a Chinese laborer, but to say to him that if by any  means he  can gain an unlawful  entry  in  the Islands he will be relieved of  the  consequences flowing from his unlawful  act if at any time after he gains his  unlawful entrance he changes his status and assumes  the occupation of one of the privileged classes, would be to  set a premium on the unlawful but successful evasion by Chinese  laborers of the laws prohibiting their entrance into the Islands,  A strained construction of a  particular section of a statute which would tend to  defeat the main  object for which the statute was enacted and to encourage the  violations of its principal prohibitory provisions should not be adopted when the language of the section under consideration clearly admits of a construction in harmony with the spirit and intent of the statute as a whole.  The  failure of a  Chinese laborer to comply with the provisions of section 4 of Act No. 702  having  once rendered his residence unlawful, and he having thus become subject to deportation for  lack of the prescribed certificate, his residence continues  to be unlawful up to  the time when he is "found within  the Philippine Islands without such  certificate."   His residence being unlawful he can not lawfully assume the status  of a merchant, and  of course  it is only the  lawful status of a merchant which is  intended to confer upon a  Chinese  person  the privileges accorded to  merchants  and members  of  other privileged classes in  territory of  the  United States.  We, therefore, hold that  a Chinese laborer who  has become subject to deportation  for a failure  to comply with  the provisions of the above-cited section  4 of Act No. 702 is not and can not be purged of this  liability by the mere fact that after the  liability  had attached he changed his occupation to that of one of the privileged  classes.

In support of his contention, counsel for appellee cites the case Ex parte Ow Guen  (148 Fed. Rep., 926), which he says is the only case he has been able to find which involves the exact  question  under  consideration.   To our  minds neither the authority nor the reasoning1 of that case is conclusive.  It is an unappealed judgment of a district judge, and  the  reasoning rests  upon his assumed premise  that although the courts are required to adjudge  any unregistered Chinese laborer to be unlawfully  in the United States at any time when such person is found there and brought to trial on a charge that he is there unlawfully, nevertheless the residence of such person prior to his arrest was  lawful and  conferred  upon him  all  the  privileges incident to a lawful  residence in the country.  We are unable to  understand how a residence can be said to  be lawful which the courts  are authorized and required by law to adjudge and declare to be unlawful in the event that its legality is submitted to them for adjudication.

In the case of The U. S. vs. Chu Chee (93 Fed. Rep., 797), it was  held that "a Chinese person who obtains entry into the United States without the certificate from the Chinese Government showing him to be a member of the class privileged to enter, which is required by the Acts of Congress, can not establish his right to remain, when arrested under the Act of May 5, 1892,  as a Chinese laborer within the United States  without the certificate of residence required by law, by proof that since his entry he  has not been a laborer, but has followed the occupation of a member of the privileged class."  And on  page 804,  in the course of its decision of that  case, the United States circuit court of appeals, ninth circuit, through Circuit Judge Morrow, said:

"But it is contended on the part of the  defendants that the status of Chinese aliens domiciled  in the United  States must be determined according to  their status at the time of arrest, and not at the time of entry,  and that, upon being arrested, it was competent for them to show by affirmative proof  that they  were students engaged  in acquiring an education in our schools, and, being so engaged, they were not  members of the prohibited  class,  and not  subject to deportation.   When, however, that domicile  has been acquired contrary to, and in violation of the laws of the United States,  and when, as here, it is  only through an unlawful entry into the United States that  the Chinese persons secure a residence in  this country, they can not purge themselves of their offense  by assuming the occupation  of members of the  privileged class,  and establish the right  to  remain by proof  of  that character.   The right of the defendants to land in this country on the claim of being students was dependent upon their producing to the collector of customs, at the port of their arrival, the certificate required  by section 6 of  the Act of 1882, as amended; and to entitle them to remain here they must thereafter produce the same to the proper authorities whenever lawfully demanded."

While the  facts in this case were not strictly  analogous to those in the case under consideration,  and it may  be doubted whether the courts of these Islands would  have jurisdiction to  issue an order of deportation upon a similar state of facts arising here  (a point which  we do not now undertake to decide), nevertheless the reasoning  of  that opinion confirms  us  in our conclusion that the  residence of an unregistered Chinese laborer  in these  Islands after the date prescribed by law  for the  issue of registration certificates has elapsed is unlawful and subjects him to deportation, and that his liability to deportation continues  as a result of  this  unlawful  residence even though he  should thereafter cease to be a laborer in fact.

Ten days  hereafter let judgment be entered  reversing the appealed  judgment without costs to either  party  in this instance, and directing the court  below to enter the proper order of deportation in  accordance herewith,  and twenty days thereafter let the record be returned to the court below. It is so ordered.

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