Facts: Petitioner was a consul of Uruguay at Manila.

He was charged with

the crime of falsification of a private document.He objected to the
jurisdiction of the court on the ground that both under the Constitution of
the United States and the Constitution of the Philippines the court has no
jurisdiction to try him. He invoked Art. III, section 2 of the US consti.

Issue: Whether or not the court of first instance of manila has jurisdiction
to try the petitioner.

Ruling: Contention has no merit.

The Constitution provides that the original jurisdiction of this court "shall
include all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and
consuls." In deciding the instant case this court cannot go beyond this
constitutional provision.

The Constitution does not define the jurisdiction of this court in specific
terms, but merely provides that "the Supreme Court shall have original and
appellate jurisdiction as may be possessed and exercised by the Supreme
Court of the Philippine Islands at the time of the adoption of this
Constitution." It then goes on to provide that the original jurisdiction of
this court "shall include all cases affecting ambassadors, other public
ministers, and consuls."
We conclude, therefore, that the Court of First Instance of Manila has
jurisdiction to try the petitioner, and that the petition for a writ of
prohibition must be denied.