The ownership of ice is determined by the ownership of the bed under the water upon which the ice is formed. Thus, in the case of a non-tidal stream which is also not navigable, the ice usually belongs to the riparian owners,81 though, if the bed belongs to another, the latter owns the ice also.82 In the case of navigable non-tidal rivers, the riparian owner's right to the ice ordinarily depends upon the question whether, in that jurisdiction, the rule that the riparian owner also owns the bed of the stream is in force.83 So, in the case of lakes and ponds, the ice belongs to the owner of the land under the water.84 The owner of land is entitled to ice formed thereover, even though it results from the

But a conveyance of submerged land includes a right to reclaim other land if so intended. New Haven Steamboat Co. v. Sargent. 50 Conn. 199.

80. Bradshaw v. Duluth Imperial Mill Co., 52 Minn. 59, 53 N. W. 1066.

81. State v. Pottmeyer, 33 Ind. 402, 5 Am. Rep. 224; Marsh v. McNider, 88 Iowa, 390, 20 L. R. A. 333, 45 Am. St. Rep. 240, 55 N. W. 469; Stevens v. Kelly, 78 Me. 445, 57 Am. St. Rep. 813, 6 Atl. 868; Paine v. Woods, 108 Mass. 172; Bigelow v. Shaw, 65 Mich. 341, 8 Am. St. Rep. 902, 32 N. W. 800.

82. Allen v. Webber, 80 Wis. 531, 14 L. R. A. 361, 27 Am. St.

Rep. 51. 50 N. W. 514.

83. Washington Ice Co. v. Shortall, 101 111, 46; Wood v. Fowler, 26 Kan. 682, 40 Am. Rep. 330 Serrin v. Grefe, 67 Iowa, 196, 25 N. W. 227; Charles C. Wilson & Son v. Harrisburg, 107 Me. 207 77 Atl. 787; Bigelow v. Shaw, 65 Mich. 341, 8 Am. St. Rep. 902, 32 N. W. 800; Reysen v. Roate, 92 Wis. 543, 66 N. W. 599.

84. Clute v. Fisher, 65 Mich. 48, 31 N. W. 614; Gouverneur v. National Ice Co., 134 N. Y. 355, 18 L. R. A. 695, 30 Am. St. Rep. 669, 31 N. E. 865; "Lawton v. Her-rick, 83 Conn. 417, 76 Atl. 986; Stevens v. Kelly, 78 Me. 445, 57 Am. St. Rep. 813, 6 Atl. 868.

Sec. 306] upland.89c Any rules on the subject are, however, subject to change by force of agreement or specific provisions in the conveyances.89d

Rights of Enjoyment.

When the title to the land under the water is in the state, the right to take ice enures to the benefit of the public, and the person who first appropriates the ice is entitled thereto.87

In one state it has been decided that a sale of ice formed on a certain extent of water is a sale of personalty, stress being laid in the opinion on the "ephemeral" nature of ice, and its want of utility in

85. Brookville & M. Hydraulic Co. v. Butler, 91 Ind. 134; Stevens v. Kelley, 78 Me. 445, 57 Am. Rep. 813; Paine v. Woods, 108 Mass. 160; Bigelow v. Shaw, 65 Mich. 341, 8 Am. St. Rep. 902; Eidemiller Ice Co. v. Guthrie, 42 Neb. 238; Valentine v. Schantz, 216 N. Y. 1, L. R. A. 1916B, 1044, 109 N. E. 866. But see Mill River W. Mfg. Co. v. Smith, 34 Conn. 462, referred to in Howe v. Andrews, 62 Conn. 398, 26 Atl. 394, and Dillon v. Kansas City Ft. S. & M. R. Co., 67 Kan. 687, 74 Pac. 251.

86. Stevens v. Kelley, 78 Me. 445, 57 Am. St. Rep. 813, 6 Atl. 868; Bigelow v. Shaw, 65 Mich 341, 8 Am. St. Rep. 902, 32 N. W. 800; Dodge v. Berry, 26 Hun. 246.

The landowner cannot complain that his supply of ice is diminished by the action of the person who has the easement of flowage in drawing off the water, unless this is done maliciously. Stevens v. Kelley 78 Me. 445, 57

Am. St. Rep. 813, 6 Atl. 813; Eidemiller Ice Co. v. Guthrie, 42 Neb. 238, 28 L. R. A. 581, 60 N. W. 717.

87. Brown v. Cunningham, 82 Iowa, 512, 12 L. R. A. 583, 48 N. W. 1042; Wood v. Fowler, 26 Kan. 682, 40 Am. Rep. 330; Brastow v. Rockport Ice Co., 77 Me. 100; Woodman v. Pitman, 79 Me. 456. 1 Am. St. Rep. 342, 10 Atl. 321; Inhabitants of West Roxbury v. Stoddard, 7 Allen (Mass.) 158; Sanborn v. Peoples' Ice Co., 82 Minn., 43, 51 L. R. A. 829, 83 Am. St. Rep. 401, 84 N. W. 641.

But that one cannot appropriate ice for purposes of sale to such an extent as to affect the water in a lake to the detriment of riparian proprietors is decided in Sanborn v. Peoples' Ice Co., 82 Minn. 43, 51 L. R. A. 829, 83 Am. St. Rep. 401, 84 N. W. 641.

In Rossmiller v. State, 114 Wis. 169, 58 L. R. A. 93, 89 N. W. 839, 91 Am. St. Rep. 910, it is held that the right of the public to

Real Property.

[Sec. 307 connection with the soil.88 In other cases it is apparently regarded as of a real, rather than a personal, nature.89