| OCR Text |
Show decided cases are analyzed 35 , little difficulty is found ( hi inii ) ( applying pplying ) the rule to the facts involved in this case . The Daniel Ball Case , supra , dealt with the question whether or not a steamer operated on the Grand River , between the cities of Grand Rapids and Grand Haven , Michigan , used for transportation of ( mer mer- mer ) ¬ chandise and passengers between those places , was subject to inspection and license laws of the United States . The ultimate question was whether or not the Grand River was navigable water of the United States . The conceded facts show that the steamer in question was one of 123 tons burden . Other evidence of the navigability of the river does not appear in the opinion , but it is a matter within the judicial ( knowl knowl- knowl ) edge of this Court that the Grand River , at least as far as Grand Rapids , Michigan , had been used for many years as a highway of commerce , over which ( substan substan- substan ) ¬ tial commercial trade and travel were carried on . The question of navigability was next before this Court in connection with the Fox River , in the State of Wisconsin ( See The Montello 11 . Wall . 411-414 ) . The ( Montello Al'ontello Alontello ) was ( again aaain ) before this Court ( See The Montello , 20 Wall . 430 , 441-442 ) . This case involved the liability of the owner of a steamer , operated on the Fox River in the State of ( Wiscon Wiscon- Wiscon ) sin , between Oshkosh and Portage City , and engaged in the transportation of passengers and merchandise to procure a Federal license . On the second appeal , it appeared that the Fox River had for a period of almost 200 years been one of the important ( high high- high ) ways between the East and the West , and during |
