Vol. IV
No. 3


It is hard to understand why in Iloilo, the home of prominent lawyers, such as Gregorio Araneta, Victorino Mapa and Estanislao Yusay, no local bar has been organized at all. This appears anomalous, specially when one takes into consideration the fact that next to Manila stands Iloilo as the most progressive province and the most capable in managing her own affairs. This apparent negligence cannot be attributed to the indifference of her sons but to the fact that they want to avoid the lavish expenditure of money which always results from any social organization. And for this reason, up to the present time, they have not deemed it necessary to organize the Iloilo Bar, where mutual understanding might be established among the practicing attorneys of the locality.

Circumstances and conditions have been changed, however. Due to some difference in training between the American and the Filipino lawyers, some questions arise now and then between them which cannot be readily solved without the existence of a real local bar. Aside from this fact, Iloilo being a place where Western spirit and atmosphere seem to prevail in the sense that European culture has been adopted by the people, it is almost needless to say that the establishment and organization of a local bar—which shall have for its objects, to assist in the progress of the science of law, cooperate in the effective administration of justice, safeguard the honor of the profession, propose legislative reforms, and foster unity, bring forth mutual understanding and establish amicable relations amongst its members—is a necessity. In this way, an association can be organized which shall have a national character similar to those of the other progressive countries, such as the ancient Inns of Court of England, the Bar Associations of the United States, the Auwalts Kammer of Germany, the Ordres des avocats of France, the Contilios dele Ordine of Italy, the Colegios de Abogados of Spain, and the Asociacao dos Advogados of Portugal.

The establishment and organization of the Iloilo Bar would bring delight to all. At present, many lawyers with brilliant careers can be found in Iloilo. Of the old regime we can cite the well-known names of Don Victorino Mapa, Don Estanislao Yusay, Don Carlos Diaz and Don Federico Zoboli. Since also the arrival of the Americans, we hear of the names of Don Jovito Yusay, Don Juan de Leon, Don Espiridion Guanko, Don Amando Avanceña, and those of Messrs. Rothrock & Smith. Today, the profession appears more interesting on account of the larger number and the various elements which compose the list of practitioners. The following are leading firms: Arroyo and Horrilleno, Block & Greenbaum, C. Lozano, R. Montinola, Deleon & Magalona, J. Lopez Vito, Yulo and Ortiz, Locsin & Lacson, Gurrea & Villalobos, Sales & Gregorius, J. Evangelista, and E. Padilla.

Mr. Arroyo became known as a brilliant attorney in the case of The Municipality of San Joaquin vs. The Roman Catholic Bishop of Jaro regarding a piece of property, and in the case of Bank of the Philippine Islands vs. Gregorio Yulo regarding the execution of mortgage. Mr. C. Lozano won his first criminal case for perjury in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo, and he showed an undisputable ability in handling civil cases in the case of Basconia vs. Bonifacio Ellacuria regarding the recovery of a certain sum of money. Likewise, the following have shown themselves masters in the legal profession: R. Montinola in the election contest case of Gregorio Alvior vs. Juan Capalla, and also in the case of Alejandro and Luis Mirasol vs. Julio Avellana and the Provincial Sheriff of Iloilo regarding fraudulent alienation of property; J. Lopez Vito in the abduction case of United States vs. Anacleto Robles, and in the civil case of Aguedo Layson as administrator of the intestate Vicenta Lopez vs. Florencio Yulo for the nullification of a deed of sale; Frandisco Enaje as provincial fiscal of Iloilo in the abduction case of United States vs. Licerio Casten; J. E. Locsin in the homicide case of United States vs. Enrique Maca, in the estafa case of United States vs. The Policemen of Oton, and in the civil case of Consolacion Madroñana vs. Aniceto Bakabak regarding partition of property.

Besides the attorneys-at-law mentioned in the foregoing, there are others who do not practice their profession, either because they devote their whole time to busi-ness or commerce, or because they devote themselves solely to politics. These are: R. Melliza, M. Locsin, R. Jocson, A. Avanceña, F. Villanueva, M. Borromeo, J. B. Ledesma, Q. Abeto, E. Gustilo, I. Doronila, V. Lopez, R. Lopez, E. Villanueva R. T. Jimenea, S. Laguda, G. Jalbuena, R. Jalbuena, P. Sindico, A. Montinola, R. Orozco and J. Bordman.

* This article was originally written in Spanish by a prominent attorney from Iloilo under the nom de plume of Ramiro Silvo.—S. R. C.

Provided by Francis Peloharo