, 1890-10-23
SOUND TIDE LANDS.
An Opinion by Judge Han
ford on the Matter.
WHERE THE BOUNDARY LINE is
Land Subject to Daily Overiows
Not Open to Entry-The
Decision.

bSIlp VIII Do lnttTestou III uil
opinion filed by Judge Hanford, Of the
United states district court to-day, In
the case of jacob Mann VS.. tho Tacoma
Land Company. The court holds that
under the land laws of the United States
the line OF high tide is the boundary be-
tween tho land and water, and that an
act of congress can not be so constructed
as to authorize the entry OF the mud
flats, or tide lands at low tide, but sub
jcet to daily overflow. The demurrer to
the amended complaint was sustained.
Following is the opinion in full
Surveys of public lands, under the
land laws of the United States. The line
of ordinary high tide of the shore of all
arm of the sea is the boundary between
the land and the water where the sur.
yeys of the public lands Of the United
states terminate.
The act OF congress providing for the
issuance of Valentine scrip and for its
location upon unoccupied aud unappro.
priated public land can not be SO con.
structed so as to authorize the entry
with said scrip of said fats, bare at low
tide, but subject to daily overflow, sit
uatcd in one Of the harbors OF terri.
tory, and which has been omitted from
the surveys made of public lands sur
rounding such harbor.
This case has been submitted upon a
demurrer to the plaintiffs amended bill.
The plaintiff claiming TO own three sepa-
rate forty-acre tracts OF the mudhats in
Tacoma, brings this suit for an injunc-
ton to prevent the defendant from pro-
ceeding further with certain harbor inn
proyements 1t is making In front of land
1t owns abutting upon the Shore which
the bill alleges will interfere with the
plaintiff IN the possession and use of the
premises which he claims to own.
The bill shows that said premises
are what is commonly known
as tide lands or mud flats, and are
situated below the line of ordinary high
tide; that they are bare at ordinary low
tide, but subject to overflow daily, and
are not within the surveys of the public
lands of the United States. The
plaintiffs claim of title is based upon
the location thereon oi certain land
scrip called "Nalenline scrip" The
plaintiff and his vendors were owners
of the scrip, and they located the same
and filed tile proper certificates and
declarations in the United States land
office at Seattle on October 30, 1889,
which time was prior to the presidents
proclamation making complete the ad-
mission into the Union of this state
but su ubsequent to all the acts OF legisla-
'ion and proceedings leading up TO that
event.
In deciding this case shall leave un-
touched the interesting question as to
the power OF congress TO dispose of lide
lands in the territory and most of the
many other important quest ons which
have been discussed in the very able
arguments made before me, my opinion
being such that IL is unnecessary for Inc
to do more than pass upon the single
question MS to the validity of the plain
, TINS claim OF title, and single reason
for my opinion upon that question is all
that need be given. The Valentine scrip
was issueu pursuant to the act of con-
gress of April az statutes
OF the United States 649) Ior the relief
of Thomas Is. Valentine authorizing
the scrip to be issued to him and author
lzing h,m or his legal re representatives. to
locate such scrip upon such unoccupied
and unapprogriated public lands of the
United States, whether surveyed or un-
surveyed as he or his legal representa-
tives might select. The act provided
further that such selection should be
made, 1t on unsurveyod lands, so as to
conform to the government surveys
when the land should be surveyed, and
in tracts of not less than forty acres.
This statute authorizes the location and
cHtTy VI ldHu WHICH, " the tline OF ell
try, either has been or remains to be sur
veyed and included in the public sur
veys of the township, according to the
established and known rules governing
the land surveys of the Unit,S States,
and obviously 1t was not in,ended by
congress to give Mr.. Valentine, his rep.
resentatives or vendors, any right 10
acquire title by use OF such scrip to any
part Of II navigable river channel or har-
Dor, or the bed or shore thereof situated
outside the limits, subject to survey
according TO established rules. As a
part OF = general plan and system for the
sale and disposition OF the lands OF the
United States, the laws provide for sur
veys to be made, and officers specially
r qualified 10 do that work and charged
with official responsibility are as
: signed to the duty of subdividing the
/ land and locating and establishing
T the boundaries. The lands surrounding
surveyed, and tho boundary line between
e the land and the water of the bay has
! been by this official survey located and
established. The line is approximately
the linr of ordinary high tide. which,
according to all the laws and usages OF
this country, is the boundary line divid-
ing the land and the water, and the
limit TO which the surveys may lawfully
, extend.
The space which the plaintiff seeks to
protect is not surveyed as land, and re-
mains unsurveyed because IL is situated
outside of this boundary, and it was
regarded by the official surveyor as
being not land at all, but
as water. The work of the
surveyors in the field with their plate
, and field notes has been approved by
the commissioner of the general land
office, and 1t Is TO all matters relating to
the sale and disposition of the lands OF
| a 'nttn ntau al ut,t. -
ing upon all persons having to deal with
the United States as we'll as upon the
government itself (Bates VS.. Illinois
Central Railroad Company, block 204. }
Therefore in my opinion the plaintiff
could acquire no title or right to the
premises lac claims by the proceedings
in the land office, and can not lawfully
maintain this suit. The demurrer will
be sustained and decree dismissiny x
the bill with costs will he entered.
G. II. HANFORD,
United States District Judge.
An appeal to the United States sn-