 By the preceding course of reasoning we have arrived at these general conclusions.: First, the shores of navigable waters, and the soils under them, were not granted by the Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the States respectively....  The Monthly Law Reporter - Page 1841857Full view - About this book
 | Ransom Hebbard Tyler - Boundaries (Estates) - 1876 - 604 pages
...has been subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States. It was held in I84o, that the shores of navigable waters and the soils under them were not granted by the Constitution of the United States, but were reserved to the States respectively ; and that the new States have the... | |
 | Isaac Grant Thompson - Law reports, digests, etc - 1876 - 854 pages
...Jersey Co., 15 How. 426. The shores of navigable waters and the soil under them were not granted by th 9 Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the States respectively. And new States have the same rights of sovereignty and jurisdiction over this subject as the original... | |
 | Orlando Bump - Constitutional law - 1878 - 474 pages
...regulation which the law prescribes. Corfield v. Coryell, 4 Wash. CC 371; Bennett v. Boggs, Bald. 60. The shores of navigable waters and the soils under...States, but were reserved to the States respectively. Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How. 212; Guy v. Hermance, 5 Cal. 73; Seabury v. Field, 1 McA. 1 ; Griffing v.... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1899 - 986 pages
...original states possessed over the navigable waters within their respective limits. It was also held that the shores of navigable waters and the soils under them were not granted by the constitution of the United States, but were reserved to the states respectively, and the new states had the same... | |
 | Isaac Grant Thompson - Law reports, digests, etc - 1884 - 880 pages
...thereof.'" He arrives at these conclusions : " First, that the shores of iiarijrsiblc waters and the soil under them were not granted by the Constitution to...States, but were reserved to the States respectively : Second, the new States have the same rights, sovereignty and jurisdiction over this subject as the... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1918 - 1214 pages
...OWNERSHIP. The shores of navigable waters and the soils ander them were not granted by the federal Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the states respectively, and new states have the ssme rights, sovereignty, and jurisdiction over such shores as the original... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1885 - 890 pages
...constitutional power to exercise it. Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How., 230; Grilling v. Gibb, McAl., 224. g 800. The shores of navigable waters, and the soils under...States, but were reserved to the states respectively, and new states have the same rights, sovereignty and jurisdiction over this subject as the original... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1885 - 1072 pages
...Waddell, 16 Pet., 867; Russell v. Jersey Co., 15 How., 426. The shores of navigable waters and the soil under them were not granted by the Constitution to...States, but were reserved to the States respectively. And new States have the same rightsof sovereignty and jurisdiction over this subject as the original... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1886 - 940 pages
...low water mark. It was decided a great many years ago by the supreme court of the United States that the shores of navigable waters, and the soils under...States, but were reserved to the states respectively. Pollard's Lessee v. Hagan, 3 How. 219. That decision has ever since been adhered to; and in Railroad... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1886 - 1008 pages
...CONBTITDTIONAI. LAW — SROKE8 OF NAVIGABLE STREAMS. The shores of navigable waters, and the Boils under them, were not granted by the constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the stales, respectively. 2. BOUNDARIES— MEANDER LINE, HOW DETERMINED. The correct location of a certain... | |
| |
