 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 1821857Full view - About this book
 | United States. Supreme Court - Law reports, digests, etc - 1911
...against piers. The shores of navigable waters and the sou under them between high and low water marks were not granted by the Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the States reapectivefendants made title to three of these lots, which bounded on the river, and it was admitted... | |
 | United States - 1913
...between the several States and foreign nations. In Pollard v. Hagan (3 How., 212) it was held that the shores of navigable waters and the soils under them were not granted by the Constitution of ths United States, but were reserved to the States respectively. That was an Alabama case, and the... | |
 | United States. Congress. House. Committee on Public Lands - Hydroelectric power plants - 1914 - 772 pages
...cession. ******* " By the preceding course of reasoning we have arrived at these general conclusions: First, the shores of navigable waters, and the soils...States but were reserved to the States respectively. Second, the new States have the same rights, sovereignty, and jurisdiction over this subject as the... | |
 | United States. Congress. House. Public lands - 1914
...reasoning we have arrived at these general conclusions: First, the shores of navigable waters, nnd the soils under them, were not granted by the Constitution...the United States but were reserved to the States res|>ectively. Second, the new States have the same rights, sovereignty, and Jurisdiction over this... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Public Lands - Public lands - 1915 - 932 pages
...Alabama. ******* " By the preceding course of reasoning we have arrived at these general conclusions : First, the shores of navigable waters, and the soils...the United States, but were reserved to the States, respecively; secondly, the new States have the same rights, sovereignty, and jurisdiction over this... | |
 | United States - 1916
...opinion as follows: By the preceding course of reasoning we have arrived at these general conclusions: First. The shores of navigable waters and the soils...States, but were reserved to the States respectively. Second. The new States have the same rights, sovereignty, and jurisdiction over this subject as the... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary - Water-power - 1916 - 47 pages
...opinion as follows: By the preceding course of reasoning we have arrived at these general conclusions: First. The shores of navigable waters and the soils...States, but were reserved to the States respectively. Second. The new States have the same rights, sovereignty, and jurisdiction over this subject as the... | |
 | Niagara Falls (N.Y. and Ont.) - 1918
...commerce between the several States and foreign nations. In Pollard v. Hogan, 3 How. 212, it was 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. That was an Alabama case, and the... | |
 | Law reports, digests, etc - 1918
...waters are sovereign lands of the state. 2. NAVIGABLE WATERS <3=3G(1)— LANDS UNDER WATER— OWNERSHIP. The shores of navigable waters and the soils under them were not granted by the federal Constitution to the United States, but were reserved to the states respectively, and new states... | |
 | New York (State). Legislature - Government publications - 1919
...commerce between the several States and foreign nations. Tn Pollard v. Hogan, 3 How. 212, it was 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. That was an Alabama case, and the... | |
| |
