OCR Text |
Show 11 oldalloilla claims complete ( ownership olvilership ) of the entire bed of the river ( within 'withiii withiii ) that State , , and in support of its claim ( contends contelids ) that the river throughout its eoiirse ill the State is navigable , and therefore that oli the ( adillis- adillis ) Sion of the State into the , ( Union Ullioll ) , on ( Novein- Novein ) ber 16 , 1907 , the title to the river bed passed froin the United States to the State in ( vir- vir ) We of the ( constitutional Colistitlitionil ) rule of equality aniong the States whereby each . new State ( be- be ) comes , as was each of the original States , , the owner of the soil underlying the navigable ( waters wCaters ) within its borders . If that ( section sectiou ) of the river be navigable , its bed iindoubtedly became the property of the State under that rule . Those who oppose the ( State's States ) claim recognize that this is so ; and the ( State S-State SState ) ( coii- coii ) cedes that its claim is not tenable , if that ( sec- sec ) tion of the river be not navigable . So the real question in this ( connection counection ) is whether the river is navigable in ( Oklahoma Oklahoiiia ) . And in ( Brewer-Elliott BrewerElliott Brewer-Blliott BrewerBlliott ) Oil ( Company Compau ) v . United States 260 U . . S . . 772 it was said , at page SS : It is not for a State by courts or ( legisla- legisla ) ture , in dealing with the general subject of beds of ( streams streanis ) , , to adopt a retroactive rule for determining navigability which would destroy a title already accrued ulider federal law and grant or would enlarge wliat actually passed to the State , , at the time of her ( admis- admis ) sion , under the constitutional rule of equality here invoked . . 96891-30-2 2 |