DOJ Opinion No. 047, s. 1955

DOJ OPINION NO. 047 , s. 1955 4th Indorsement February 21, 1955 Respectfully returned to the Honorable, the Secretary of Commerce and Industry, Manila. Opinion is requested whether or not the business of a Chinese druggist falls within the contemplation of Republic Act No. 1180. The requisites of a retail business under Republic Act No. 1180 are: (a) habitually selling merchandise, commodities or goods, (b) direct to the general public, and (c) for consumption. (Opinion No. 253, s. 1954.) In a previous opinion, we held that a drugstore that compounds, dispenses, and sells medicines and drugs in small quantities to the general public for use and consumption, is a retail business in contemplation of the Act. (Opinion No. 248, s. 1954.) The Revised Administrative Code provides that "a person holding a certificate as Chinese druggist shall not engage in the general practice of pharmacy, and his sales of Chinese drugs and medicine shall be limited to persons of Chinese blood and their families." (Section 742.) By law, then, the business of a Chinese druggist is limited to a specified group of customers. Doubt may be entertained whether such a restricted clientele would constitute the "general public". The word "public" has been defined differently depending on the context in which it is found. In one sense, the "public" is everybody; accordingly, "public" has been employed as meaning the body of the people at large (People v. Powell, 274 N.W. 372); and "sales to the public" has been held to mean sales to the community at large, all of the inhabitants of a particular place and not limited to portion of the people (People vs. Ruthven, 288 N.Y.S. 631). Other cases have held that "public" does not mean all of the public, nor most of the people, nor very many of the people of a place, but so many of them as contradistinguishes them from a few State v. Luce, Del., 32 A. 1076; State v. Baker, 102 N.E. 732; People v. Powell, 274 N.W. 372.) Considering the number of Chinese residents in this country, as well as persons of Chinese blood and their families, it may be plausibly contended that selling to this group of customers is "selling to the general public" within the purview of the Act. But a more impelling consideration deserves attention, and that is the fact that the business of a Chinese druggist is intended solely for Chinese nationals, as implied from Section 741 of the Revised Administrative Code. This provision requires any applicant for the certificate of a Chinese druggist to present to the Board of Pharmaceutical Examiners "a certificate from the Chinese consul at Manila that he is competent and qualified to conduct a Chinese drugstore in accordance with the laws and customs of the Chinese Republic." Since, by this requirement a Chinese drugstore can be operated competently only by Chinese and solely for the benefits of persons of Chinese blood and their families, and since very few, if any, Filipinos would be interested in, or be capable of, engaging in this type of business, it could hardly have been the intention of Congress to nationalize it. Premises considered, the undersigned believes that the query should be, as it is hereby, answered in the negative. (SGD.) PEDRO TUASON Secretary of Justice