Running waters are not owned by those who own the land over which they flow. These riparian owners, as they are called, have only an easement in such waters. These rights in water are treated as real property.23 But standing water and percolations beneath the surface belong to the owner of the soil.24 In any case a man has the exclusive right to sail, fish, etc., in water overlying his land.25 But there are no such exclusive rights in connection with navigable waters,26 because the title to the soil under them is in the state.27 This is, however, denied by some cases, which hold the title to the bed of a navigable river to be in the riparian proprietor.28 Navigable rivers are those which are navigable in fact.29

19 Slosson, J., in Sherry v. Frecking, 4 Duer (N. Y.) 452, 457; Welles, J., in Aiken v. Benedict, 39 Barb. (N. Y.) 401.

20 Grandona v. Lovdal, 70 Cal. 161, 11 Pac. 623; Smith, J., in Countryman v. Lighthill, 24 Hun, 406. But he has no right to the fruit on trees overhanging his land. Skinner v. Wilder, 38 Vt. 115; Lyman v. Hale, 11 Conn. 177. When a tree standing on one man's land sends roots into the soil of an adjoining proprietor, the one on whose land the trunk stands owns all the tree and its fruit. Masters v. Pollle, 2 Rolle, 141; Holder v. Coates, 1 Moody & M. 112; Lyman v. Hale, 11 Conn. 177; Hoffman v. Armstrong, 48 N. Y. 201; Skinner v. Wilder, 38 Vt. 115. But, as holding that they are tenants in common, see Waterman v. Soper, 1 Ld. Raym. 737. They are tenants In common when the tree stands on the line. Griffin v. Bixby. 12 N. H. 454; Dubois v. Beaver, 25 N. Y. 123.

21 Lillibridge v. Coal Co., 143 Pa. St. 293, 22 Atl. 1035; Delaware, L. & W. R. Co. v. Sanderson, 109 Pa. St. 583, 1 Atl. 394; Lee v. Bumgardner, So Va. 815. 10 S. E. 3.

22 2 Bl Comm. 17; Smith, C. J., in Johnson v. Richardson, 33 Miss. 462, 464; Ray, C. J., in State v. Pottmeyer, 33 lnd. 402, 403; Williamson v. Jones, 39 W. Va. 231, 19 S. E. 436.

23 See post, p. 368.

24 Ocean Grove v. Asbury Park, 40 N. J. Eq. 447, 3 Atl. 168; Village of Brooklyn v. Smith, 104 111. 429; Alexander v. U. S., 25 Ct Cl. 87; Hills v,

Bishop, 63 Hun, 624, 17 N. Y. Supp. 297; Walker v. Board, 16 Ohio, 540; People v. Platt, 17 Johns. 195.

25 Shrunk v. Navigation Co., 14 Serg. & R. 70; Reece v. Miller, 8 Q. B. Div. 626; Waters v. Lilley, 4 Pick. 145; Mcfarlin v. Essex Co., 10 Cush. 304; Com. v. Chapin, 5 Pick. 199; Cobb v. Davenport, 32 N. J. Law, 369; Heck-man v. Swett, 107 Cal. 276, 40 Pac. 420.

26 Carson v. Blazer, 2 Bin. 475; Arnold v. Mundy, 6 N. J. Law, 1; Martin v. Waddell, 16 Pet. 367; Mccready v. Virginia, 94 U. S 391, Weston v. Sampson-8 Cush. 347; Chalker v. Dickinson, 1 Conn. 382; Attorney General v. Cham bers, 4 De Gex, M. & G. 206; Sollers v. Sollers (Md.) 26 Atl. 188. And see Bagott v. Orr, 2 Bos. & P. 472; Packard v Ryder, 144 Mass. 440, 11 N. E. 578. But cf. Anon., 1 Camp. 517, note; Blundell v. Catterall, 5 Barn. & Ald. 268; Fleet v. Hegeman, 14 Wend. 42.

27 Pacific Gas Imp. Co. v. Ellert, 64 Fed. 421; Shively v. Bowlby, 152 U. S. 1, 14 Sup. Ct 548; Barney v. Keokuk, 94 U. S. 324; Poor v. Mcclure, 77 Pa. St. 214; Flannagan v. Philadelphia, 42 Pa. St. 219; Mcmanus v. Carmichael, 3 Iowa, 1; Tomlin v. Railway Co., 32 Iowa, 106; Cooley v. Golden, 117 Mo. 33, 23 S. W. 100; Smith v. Levinus, 8 N. Y. 472; People v. Appraisers, 33 N. Y. 461; Rumsey v. Railway Co., 130 N. Y. 88, 28 N. E. 763; Saunders v. Railway Co., 144 N. Y. 75, 38 N. E. 992; State v. Pacific Guano Co., 22 S. C. 50; Bullock v. Wilson, 2 Port. 436; Goodwin v. Thompson, 83 Tenn. 209; Concord Manuf'g Co. v. Robertson, 66 N. H. 1, 25 Atl. 718; Illinois Cent R. Co. v. Illinois, 146 U. S. 387, 13 Sup. Ct. 110; Wainwright v. Mccullough, 63 Pa. St. 66. But cf. Wilson v. Welch, 12 Or. 353, 7 Pac. 341; Coxe v. State, 144 N. Y. 396, 39 N. E. 400. That the title to the bed of such streams is not in the United States, see Pollard v. Hagan, 3 How. 212. A riparian proprietor on a nonnavigable river owns the bed of the stream to the center. Ingraham v. Wilkinson, 4 Pick. (Mass.) 268; Wiggenhorn v. Kountz, 23 Neb. 690, 37 N. W. 603.

28 Norcross v. Griffiths, 65 Wis. 599, 27 N. W. 606; Olson v. Merrill, 42 Wis. 203; Ensminger v. People, 47 111. 384; Middleton v. Pritchard, 4 111. 510; Houck v. Yates, 82 111. 179; Trustees of Schools v. Schroh. 120 111. 509, 12 N. E. 243; Gavit v. Chambers, 3 Ohio, 496; Blanchard v. Porter. 11 Ohio, 139; Commissioners of Canal Fund v. Kempshall, 26 Wend. (N. Y.) 404; Berry v.

29 See note 29 on following page.

The English rule that only those in which the tide ebbs and flows are navigable does not apply in this country.30

Ice belongs to the owner of the land over which it is formed,31 but ice formed on public waters belongs to the one first appropri-ating it.32

Snyder, 3 Bush (Ky.) 266; Brown v. Chadboume, 31 Me. 9; Keyport, etc., Steamboat Co. v. Farmers' Transp. Co., 18 N. J. Eq. 13; Morgan v. Reading, 3 Smedes & M. (Miss.) 366; Steamboat Magnolia v. Marshall, 39 Miss. 109; Cates v. Wadlington, 1 Mccord (S. C.) 580; Mathis v. Board of Assessors, 46 La. Ann. 1370, 16 South. 464; Gibson v. Kelly (Mont.) 39 Pac. 517. Cf. But-tenutb v. Bridge Co., 123 111. 535, 17 N. E. 439; Ryan v. Brown, 18 Mich. 196; State v. Black River Phosphate Co., 32 Fla. 82, 13 South. 640; Wood v. Town of Edenton, 115 N. C. 10, 20 S. E. 165.

29 Weise v. Smith, 3 Or. 445; Rhodes v. Otis, 33 Ala. 578; Mcmanus v. Carmichael, 3 Iowa, 1; Morgan v. King, 35 N. Y. 454; Spring v. Russell, 7 Greenl. (Me.) 273; American River Water Co. v. Amsden, 6 Cal 443; Jones v. Johnson (Tex. Civ. App.) 25 S. W. 650; Commissioners of Homochitto River v. Withers, 29 Miss. 21; Bayzer v. Mill Co. (Ala.) 16 South. 923; The Daniel Bell, 10 Wall. 557; The Montello, 20 Wall. 430; Chisolm v. Caines, 67 Fed. 285; Stover v. Jack, 60 Pa. St. 339; Heyward v. Mining Co., 42 S. C. 138, 19 S. E. 963, and 20 S. E. 64; Falls Manufg Co. v. Oconto River Imp. Co., 87 Wis. 134, 58 N. W. 257. And see Volk v. Eldred, 23 Wis. 410; Lewis v. Coffee Co., 77 Ala. 190; Rowe v. Bridge Corp., 21 Pick. 344; State v. Gilman-ton, 14 N. H. 4G7; People v. Elk River Mill & Lumber Co. (Cal.) 40 Pac. 431; State v. Eason, 114 N. C. 787, 19 S. E. 88. That the stream must be navigable in its natural state, see Jeremy v. Elwell, 5 Ohio Cir. Ct. R. 379; Ten Eyck v. Town of Warwick, 75 Hun, 562, 27 N. Y. Supp. 536.