"14. After the change of sovereignty the city council of Ponce attempted to record in the registry of property the possession of the said church, and the lot upon which the same is situated, but in view of the fact that this was contrary to the provisions of paragraph 2 of article 25 of the regulations for the application of the mortgage law, which excludes the inscription of public temples used for Catholic worship, the registrar of property of the district of Ponce refused to make the inscription, unless a decision be obtained from the secretary of justice to authorize the same, notwithstanding the prohibitive provisions of the regulations. The secretary of justice rendered the decision applied for, repealing, without being a legislative authority, the said article 25 of the regulations in its second paragraph."

The Supreme Court of Porto Rico rendered the following judgment at San Juan, Porto Rico, May 21, 1906:

"This cause having heretofore been regularly called for decision upon the demurrer filed by the defendant to the plaintiff's complaint, and the same having been duly considered and overruled, and leave granted the defendant to file an answer within the time prescribed by law, and the said defendant having failed to file such answer, and judgment by default having been duly rendered therein, all of which proceedings appear in the record of this court, it is accordingly now hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed that the plaintiff have judgment against the defendant as prayed for in the complaint, and that all adverse claims whatsoever of the defendant and of all persons claiming or to claim the property herein described, or any part thereof, under said defendant, are hereby ordered, adjudged and decreed to be invalid and groundless, null and void; and that the plaintiff be and hereby is declared, adjudged and decreed to be the sole, true and lawful owner of the houses and lands hereinafter described, as set forth in the complaint, and every part and parcel thereof, and that the title of the plaintiff thereto is adjudged and decreed to be quieted against any and all claims and demands

of the defendant; and the said defendant is hereby perpetually enjoined and estopped from setting up any claim or title whatever thereto, or to any part thereof.

"Said premises are bounded and described as follows:

""The first is a building constructed of brick and masonry, situated in the city of Ponce, on an area of sixty-five meters and eight centimeters wide, including the walk, the building measuring forty-eight meters long by twenty-four meters and sixty-seven centimeters wide; bounded on the north by the Plaza Principal; on the south by the Plaza de las Delicias; on the east by the fire department, which is situated on the same lot or yard as the church; on the west by the said Plaza Principal.

""The second is another building situated in the center of the Plaza de la Playa de Ponce; the superficial area whereof measures forty-two meters and twenty centimeters long, by nineteen meters and forty centimeters wide; including the walk, the building measuring eighteen meters and thirty centimeters long by sixteen meters and twenty centimeters wide. It is bounded on all four sides by the Plaza de la Playa.'

"The inscription of possession heretofore made in the registry of property at Ponce, concerning the above said properties, in favor of the defendant, the municipality of Ponce, is hereby cancelled and declared to be utterly null and void, and the proper endorsement must be made upon the said registry indicating the same.

"It is hereby further ordered, adjudged and decreed that the plaintiff do have and recover all costs of this suit, which are hereby taxed at $ dollars, and that the defendant be ordered to pay the same within thirty days from this date. "Thus we pronounce, command and sign."

The case was then appealed to this court, and the following errors assigned:

"First. That the Supreme Court of Porto Rico was without jurisdiction of the subject-matter in controversy.

210 U.S.

Argument for Appellant.

"Second. That said court was without jurisdiction of the parties.

"Third. That the said court erred in overruling the general demurrer and the eleven special grounds of demurrer interposed by the defendant to the complaint filed in said cause.

"Fourth. That the said court erred in rendering judgment against defendant in said cause, upon the pleadings in said cause, and that the judgment is contrary to the law and the facts as stated in the pleadings in said cause.

"Fifth. That the court erred in entering judgment without taking evidence and proofs or setting the cause upon the docket for hearing.

"Sixth. That the said court erred in rendering judgment in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in said cause."

Mr. Frederick L. Cornwell, for appellant, submitted:

The act of the legislative assembly of Porto Rico, approved March 10, 1904, conferring original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court of Porto Rico is absolutely void, as being contrary to the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Davidson v. New Orleans, 96 U. S. 101; Weimar v. Bunbury, 30 Michigan, 214; Robertson v. Baldwin, 165 U. S. 281; Wally's Heirs v. Kennedy, 2 Yerg. (Tenn.) 554; Guy et al. v. Hermance et al., 5 California, 73.

The act is void for the further reason that the legislative assembly had no power to enact a private or special law, such being contrary to the organic act establishing civil government in Porto Rico and contrary to the acts of Congress applicable to all Territories. 31 Stat. at Large, 77 (§ 14); 24 Stat. at Large, p. 170; Martin v. Territory, 8 Oklahoma, 41; S. C., 48 Pac. Rep. 106.

The legislative assembly exceeded its power and authority when it attempted to alter, change, amend or augment the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Porto Rico, and the Supreme Court of Porto Rico was absolutely without the power

and authority to hear and adjudicate this case as a nisi prius or trial court, and all the proceedings had by the Supreme Court in this case are absolutely null and void. 31 Stat. at Large, 77; Perris v. Higley et al., 20 Wall. 375; Territory v. Ortiz, 1 N. M. 5; Cooley on Constitutional Limitations (3d ed.), p. 392.

The Supreme Court of Porto Rico was without jurisdiction of the parties, because the Roman Catholic Church in Porto Rico is neither a natural person nor a corporation, or if a corporation then it has not complied with the laws so as to enable it to sue and be sued in the courts of Porto Rico. The laws of Porto Rico having specifically stated the terms under which a foreign corporation may do business in Porto Rico, it was necessary that the church should show that it had complied with all these conditions before it could be entitled to sue.

Mr. Frederic R. Coudert and Mr. Howard Thayer Kingsbury, with whom Mr. Paul Fuller was on the brief, for appellee:

The law under which this suit was brought by the church is a valid enactment of the legislative assembly of Porto Rico, wholly within the scope of its powers under the organic act. Kent v. Porto Rico, 207 U. S. 113, 117. The act does not come within the prohibitions, in the general laws of Congress relating to the Territories, as to local and special laws, etc. American Ins. Co. v. Canter, 1 Pet. 511; Hornbuckle v. Toombs, 18 Wall. 648. But whether so or not, the act under consideration is not objectionable as a special law. Vanzant v. Waddell, 2 Yerg. 260; Cotting v. Kansas City Stock Yards Co., 183 U. S. 105; People ex rel. Kenny v. Folks, 89 App. Div. (N. Y.) 179; United States v. Union Pac. Co., 98 U. S. 569. See also Bank of Columbia v. Okely, 4 Wheat. 255; Bank of Newbern v. Taylor, 6 N. C. 266.

The Roman Catholic Church in Porto Rico is a juristic personality and a legal entity under the laws of Porto Rico, as it had always been under the Spanish laws in force in the island at the time of the ratification of the Treaty of Paris.

The Roman Catholic Church has been recognized as possessing a legal personality and a capacity to take and acquire property since the time of the Emperor Constantine. The American law has been no less liberal in recognizing the corporate entity of churches than has the European and English law. Werlein v. New Orleans, 177 U. S. 390, 401. The Holy See still occupies a recognized position in international law of which the courts must take judicial notice. 1 Moore's Digest of Int. Law, pp. 130, 131.

Upon the facts stated in the petition the church has a good title to the property in question.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE FULLER, after making the foregoing statement, delivered the opinion of the court.

This suit was brought under an act of the legislative assembly of Porto Rico, entitled "An act to confer original jurisdiction on the Supreme Court of Porto Rico for the trial and adjudication of certain property claimed by the Roman Catholic Church in Porto Rico," approved March 10, 1904, as follows: "Be it enacted by the Legislative Assembly of Porto Rico:

"SEC 1. Original jurisdiction is hereby conferred on the Supreme Court of Porto Rico for the trial and adjudication of all questions now existing or which may arise, between the Roman Catholic Church in Porto Rico and the people of Porto Rico, affecting property rights, whether real or personal or mixed, claimed by either party.

"SEC. 2. The Attorney General of Porto Rico shall be authorized to accept service for the people of Porto Rico of any citation, summons or other process issued by said court in said proceedings.

"SEC. 3. The Supreme Court, for the purpose of such trial and adjudication, shall have the right to issue process for witnesses and to receive and hear testimony, and the procedure in said court shall be the same, as near as may be, as that prescribed for the District Courts of Porto Rico in civil cases, and