NOTES OF RECENT CASES when dealing with the argument that the law of prescription cannot be universally applicable in new countries: " We cannot see that there would be any difficulty in administering the law of prescription, so far as it regards ancient lights, in a new country, so soon as occupation has proceeded to such an extent as to allow of a continued en joyment for twenty years. . . . We are of opinion that the law of prescription as to ancient lights was a law which could be applied in New South Wales within the meaning of the statute 9 Geo. IV, chap. 83, and therefore because part of the law of the colony at that time, even if it had not been brought in with them by the first colonists." So opposed to this decision were the people of the state, as an instance of law establishing a state of property inconsistent with modern conditions and with the bright climate of Axistralia, that the state parliament passed a statute which provides: — "SECTION i. From and after the commence ment of this act no right to the access or use of light to or for any building shall be deemed to exist or to be capable of coming into existence by reason only of the enjoyment of such access or use for any period or of any presumption of a lost grant based upon such enjoyment." There is also a clause saving the rights of parties under decisions already given, or to proceedings pending. This settles the law of " ancient lights" in New South Wales, but as the reasoning of the high court applies to the acquisition of other ease ments it may be that by the strength of the unex plained enjoyment for a period of twenty years or upwards a right of way, for instance, may be ac quired in the state. PROPERTY (see Limitations) . RELIGIOUS SOCIETIES. (Membership.) Wash.- — Hendryx v. People's United Church of Spokane, 84 Pac. 1123, marks an exception to the well-recognized rule relative to the extent to which courts will interfere with the affairs of reli gious corporations. There are many adjudications mostly based, as the court says, upon Shannon v. Frost, 3 B. Mon. 253, Waston v. Jones, 13 Wall. 679, and Nance v. Busby, 18 S. W. 874, which held that where a religious organization has adopted a creed and made provisions for church govern,ment which authorize the expulsion of members, the action of the church in that regard is final, and courts will only inquire whether the organiza tion in question is a church, and whether the tribunal which has imposed the sentence of expul sion is the one endowed by the church laws with power in the premises. Admitting this to be the general rule, the court holds in the case under consideration that where members of a church are expelled in pursuance of a fraudulent scheme to obtain control of the prop
481
erty of the church and divert it from its original purpose to the use and benefit of the perpetrators of the scheme, the expulsion is void and the mem bers so expelled have a right to maintain an action for the protection of the church property. STATUTE. (Interpretation — Anti-Cigarette Law.) Ind. — In connection with the Nebraska case found elsewhere in this number and inter preting the anti-cigarette bill of that state, it is not amiss to call attention to the case of State v. Lowry, 77 N. E. 728, where somewhat different questions are raised concerning the scope and application of the Indiana statute. As a basis for the more important decision as to the precise ap plication of the statute it is first declared that the importation of cigarettes in original packages for personal consumption is a transaction involving interstate commerce and is not within the anticigarette act, and as such importation is protected by the interstate commerce law, cigarettes so imported for the personal consumption of the importer do not become subject to state regulation on the termination of the transportation, nor while they are in the importer's possession for personal consumption. The statute, which is very broad in its terms, prohibits the manufacture, sale, keeping for sale, owning, or giving away of cigar ettes, and provides penalties for violation thereof, and declares that it shall be unlawful for any per son, directly or indirectly, to sell, dispose of, or give away, keep, own, or be concerned in owning or keeping any cigarettes, must be construed, says the court, in view of its title, namely, " An Act to regulate the manufacture, sale, and giving away of cigarettes." It is held that the act should not be construed as intended to prohibit the act of smoking cigarettes or keeping them in possession for the sole purpose of smoking. STATUTE. (Interpretation— Cigarettes.) Neb. — In a rather brief opinion the Supreme Court of Nebraska construes of a statute making it unlaw ful to manufacture, sell, or give away cigarettes, and holds that the rolling of a cigarette by hand for the maker's own consumption, and from mate rials owned by the maker, is not a manufacture within the meaning of the statute. It is pointed out that the statute intentionally avoids forbid ding the use of cigarettes by individuals, and argues from this that the manufacturing prohib ited was a manufacturing for traffic, while the act of rolling cigarettes from one's own materials and for one's own use is so connected with the use as to be a part of it. Dempsey v. Stout, 107 N. W. 235 . SURETYSHIP. (Release of Surety.) Colo. — A holding for which no direct precedent has been found and which was apparently decided upon the authority of analogous cases, is delivered in A. S.
