It has occasionally been said that if part of one's land disappears by erosion or submergence, and sub32. Lovingston v. St. Clair County, 64 111. 56, 16 Am. Rep. 516; Brundage v. Knox, 279 111. 450, 117 N. E. 123; Adams v. Roberson, 97 Kan. 198, 155 Pac. 22; Adams v. Frothingham, 3 Mass. 352, 3 Am. Dec. 151; Tatum v. St. Louis, 125 Mo. 647, 28 S. W. 1002; Whyte v. City of St. Louis, 153 Mo. 80, 54 So. 478; Halsey v. Mccormick, 18 N. Y. 147 (dictum); Steers v. City of Brooklyn, 101 N. Y. 51, 4 N. E. 7; Gillihan v. Cieloha, 74 Ore. 462, 145 Pac. 1061; State v. Sturtevant, 76 Wash. 158, 135 Pac. 1035, 138 Pac. 6X0; Standly v. Perry, 3 Can. Sup. 356. Compare Dana v. Jackson St. Wharf Co., 31 Cal. 118, 89 Am. Dec. 164; Lewis v. John L. Roper Lumber Co., 113 N. C. 55, 18 S. E. 52.

33. Atty. Gen. of Southern Nigeria v. John Holt & Company, Ltd, (1915) App. Cas. 599; People ex rel. Blakeslee v. Commrs, 135 N. Y. 447, 32 N. E. 139; Saunders v. New York Cent. & H. R. R. Co., 144 N. Y. 75, 26 L. R. A. 378, 43 Am. St. Rep. 729, 38 N. E. 992; Ball v. Stack, 2 Whart. (Pa.) 508, 30 Am. Dec. 278; Menominee River Lumber Co. v. Seidl, 149 Wis. 316. 135 N. W. 854 (as against state).

34. Ante, Sec. 305.

35. Patton v. City of Los Angeles, 169 Cal. 521, 147 Pac 141; Sage v. New York, 154 N. Y. 61, 61 Am. St. Rep. 592, 58 L. R. A. 606, 47 N. E. 1096. See Hoboken v. Pennsylvania R. R. Co., 124 U. S. 656, 31 L. Ed. 543.

Sequently land forms or reappears in the same place, the latter land belongs to the person who owned the land which disappeared.36 Such a statement, however, does not appear to accord with the authorities to the effect that, by the gradual encroachment of water on one's land, one loses the part encroached on,37 and it would seem to be true only when the encroachment is sudden and perceptible, or there appears an intention that the boundary shall remain in the same location in spite of a gradual change in the location cf the water, or for some other reason the locality covered by the land which disappeared remains in the same ownership after the disappearance as before.38