OCR Text |
Show nonnavigable ( streams streanis ) . 184 This inference is clearly justified by the language of the Supreme Court in the case of ( Brewer-Elliott BrewerElliott Breiver-Elliott BreiverElliott ) Oil Co . ( v ir ) . United States , 260 U ( , . ) St , 77 , wherein it is stated as follows : It is a natural inference that Congress ( in 'n n ) its grant to the Osage Indians in 1872 made it extend to the main channel of the river , only because it ( knew kneN ) it was not navigable . This would be consistent with its general ( pol- pol ) icy . ( Eev Rev ) . Stats . , ( Sec See ) . 2476 ; Oklahoma ( v Y ) . Texas , 258 U . S . ( , 2 ) 574 ; Scott v . Lattig , 227 ( TJ U ) . S . ( , 2 ) 229f 242 ; Railroad ( Company Coiiipany ) v ( , . ) ( Scliur- Scliur Schitr- Schitr ) meirlp ( 1 7 ) ( Wall IWO ) . ( 272 '272 ) , 289 . If the Arkansas River is not navigable then the title of the Osages as granted certainly included the bed of the river as far as the main channel , ( be- be ) cause the words of the grant expressly carry the title to that line . The significance of the Executive Order of ( Presi Presi- Presi ) ¬ dent Arthur in including in the reservation a ( por- por ) tion of the beds of the San Juan and Colorado rivers is ( pointed poilited ) out by the Supreme Court in United States v . Holt State Bank 270 ( II U ) . S . 49Y 55 : But , as was pointed out in ( Sliively Shively ) v . ( Sowlby Boivlby ) , 152 ( TJ U ) . ( 8 S ) . 1 , pp . 49 , 57-58 , the United States early adopted ( and tind ) constantly has ( ad- ad ) ( hered liered ) to the policy of regarding lands under navigable waters in acquired territory , while under its sole dominion , as held for the ( ulti Ulti- Ulti ) ¬ ( mate inate ) benefit of future States , and so has ( re- re ) frained ( from froni ) making any disposal thereof , save in exceptional instances ( when Nvhen ) impelled |