Turning now to a consideration of the continued validity and enforceability of compacts between the States and General Government with reference to proprietary interests, one finds the comparatively recent case of Stearns v. Minnesota13 most illuminating. That case involved the construction and application of an agreement made by the State with the United States at the time of its admission to the Union, with reference to public lands, within its boundaries, owned by the United States. The court in its opinion say: "That these provisions of the Enabling Act and the Constitution, in form at least, made a compact between the United States and the State, is evident. In an inquiry as to the validity of such a compact this distinction must at the outset be noticed. There may be agreements or compacts attempted to be entered into between two States, or between the State and the Nation, in reference to political rights and obligations, and there may be those solely in reference to property belonging to one or to the other. That different considerations may underlie the question as to the validity of these two kinds of compacts or agreements is obvious. It has often been said that a State admitted into the Union enters therein in full equality with all the others, and such equality may forbid any agreement or compact limiting or qualifying political rights and obligations; whereas, on the other hand, a mere agreement in reference to property involves no question of equality of status, but only of the power of a State to deal with the Nation or with any other State in reference to such property. The case before us is one involving simply an agreement as to property between a State and the Nation. That a State and the Nation are competent to enter into an agreement of such a nature with one another has been affirmed in past decisions of this court, and that they have been frequently made in the admission of new States, as well as subsequently thereto, is a matter of history. . . . We are of opinion that there was a valid contract made with these companies in respect to the taxation of these lands - a contract which it was beyond the power of the State to impair; that this subsequent legislation does impair that contract and cannot, therefore, be" sustained."

13 179 U. S. 223; 21 Sup. Ct. Rep. 73; 45 L. ed. 162.