The constitutional grant of admiralty jurisdiction to the federal government does not operate as a cession of entire jurisdiction over the navigable waters within the borders of a state. The general jurisdiction over the subject of the grant adheres to the territory in which these waters are situated. The residuary powers of legislation still remain in the state, subject to the laws of congress over those matters within its jurisdiction.1

Sec. 5. Over what waters.- Under the English admiralty laws the test of jurisdiction is whether the waters are within the ebb and flow of the tide; the reason therefor no doubt being that all navigable rivers in that country are affected by the tide, and its action is a test of navigability. In a few of the early decisions in this country, this arbitrary ruling was followed, but the inapplicability of such a doctrine in this country to determine the question of jurisdiction soon became apparent; and since the case of The Genesee Chief, the courts have uniformly held that there is nothing in the ebb and flow of the tide that makes water peculiarly suitable for admiralty jurisdiction, or that its absence renders unfit.

The only test as to whether admiralty jurisdiction attaches is that the waters are navigable and are used, or are sus

sible in the middle of the stream. Held, that the state law was binding and not in conflict with the jurisdiction of the United States over navigable waters. Aldrich v. The W. H. Beaman, 45 Fed. R. 125. The laws of the state of New York imposing a penalty on a steam vessel for attempting to pass another under way nearer than twenty yards, held not to be ultra vires. The Boston, Olc. 407.

The Massachusetts General Statutes (ch. 78, sec. 5) provide that no person shall cause or permit to be floated down the Connecticut river

any masts, spars, logs or timber unless the same are formed and bound into rafts and placed under the care of "a sufficient number of persons to govern the same so as to prevent damages thereby." Held constitutional, even though the logs came from another state and passed through Massachusetts on their way to another state. Harrigan v. Connecticut River Lumber Co., 129 Mass. 580.

1 United States v. Bevans, 3 Wheat. 336.

212 How. 443.

ceptible of being used in their ordinary condition, as highways of commerce over which trade and commerce may be conducted. Those waters are in law navigable which are navigable as a matter of fact. The jurisdiction of admiralty in cases of tort, where it occurs on the navigable waters of the United States, is well settled, even though it occurs within the body of a county, and this without regard to the character of the trade in which the vessel is engaged,' whether it be internal exclusively or interstate: that the collision occurred on navigable waters is sufficient.

To bring a collision within the jurisdiction of admiralty, the vessels need not have been engaged in foreign or interstate commerce. If the collision occur on navigable waters of the United States admiralty has jurisdiction, even though one or both be domestic vessels."

The waters of a harbor or other navigable stream are within the jurisdiction of admiralty, even though they lie wholly within the body of a county, if they form the highway of commerce between the several states or foreign countries.

6

Sec. 6. Navigable rivers.- As before stated, the courts of this country early came to the decision that the distinction between tide water, and navigation above that limit, was purely artificial, arbitrary and unjust; that its observance would subject one part of a public river to the jurisdiction

1The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557; rine tort committed on waters The General Cass, 1 Brown, 334. which were a highway of com2 The Genesee Chief, 12 How. 444. merce, it was held that admiralty 3 Fretz v. Bull, 12 How. 466; The had jurisdiction regardless of the Magnolia, 20 How. 296; Hine v.

fact that the vessel was custom

Trevor, 4 Wall. 555; Nelson v. Le- arily employed wholly in Maryland

land, 22 How. 48.

waters and not in interstate commerce. The Tolchester, 42 Fed. R.

The Commerce, 66 U. S. (1 Black), 574; The Brooklyn, 2 Ben. 180. 547; The Flora, 1 Biss. 29.

Where the liability of the owners of a vessel arose out of a ma

5 The Commerce, 66 U.S. (1 Black), 574.

6 The Volunteer, 1 Brown, 159.

of a federal court and deny it to another part, equally public, and but a few yards distant; that no good reason could be urged for jurisdiction over one part that would not with equal force apply to any other portion of public waters used for commercial purposes and foreign trade. As early as the case of The Genesee Chief, it was held that the admiralty jurisdiction of the district court extends over the entire navigable length of all rivers of the United States, regardless of the question of the presence or absence of a tide. If a river is capable of being used, and is used, for the purposes of commerce, it is a navigable river, regardless of the kind of vessels used in its navigation, and regardless of the character of its commerce, whether it be foreign, interstate or internal to the state. The fact that the stream lies wholly within the territory of a single state, or that the collision occurs within the body of a county, is immaterial, so far as the jurisdiction of the federal courts is concerned.3 Whenever a river forms by itself or its connections a continuous highway, over which commerce may be carried on with other states or foreign countries in the usual manner, admiralty has jurisdiction over vessels navigating it, even though they are engaged in domestic trade; and when a vessel is engaged in navigating the waters of the United States between ports of the same state, she is subject to the jurisdiction of admiralty courts. Any collision of vessels or other maritime tort occurring on the navigable waters of the United States is cognizable in admiralty."

1 The Genesee Chief, 12 How. 443; Hine v. Trevor, 4 Wall. 555; United States v. Cole, 5 McLean, 513.

2 The Montello, 20 Wall. 430; United States v. B. & H. County Ferry Co., 21 Fed. R. 331.

3 The Magnolia, 61 U. S. (20 How.) 296; The General Cass, 1 Brown, 334; Nelson v. Leland, 63 U. S. (22 How.) 48.

Jackson v. The Magnolia, 20 How. 296; The Montello, 11 Wall. 411; In re Long Island North Shore Passenger and Freight Transportation Co., 5 Fed. 599.

5 The United States v. The B. & H. County Ferry Co., 21 Fed. R. 331.

6 The Commerce. 1 Black, 574; Ex parte Boyer, 109 U. S. 629.

Sec. 7. The great lakes.— The great lakes of the United States are high seas for the purposes of navigation; and every reason which extends the jurisdiction of admiralty over the waters of the Atlantic Ocean applies with equal force to the great inland seas lying in the interior and on the borders of the country. The jurisdiction of admiralty over the great lakes and their adjacent and connecting waters does not depend upon the act of congress of 1845 which attempts to confer such jurisdiction, but is given by the constitution itself; the act of congress of 1845 attempting to grant admiralty jurisdiction over certain waters having been held to be "only a legislative definition" of the meaning of the constitution, but of no force beyond that so far as the conferring of jurisdiction is concerned, that subject being wholly governed by the constitution itself.

Distinctions have been made in questions of contract as to whether the vessel is engaged in the domestic or internal trade of a state, or whether it is employed in commerce between the ports of different states; but in questions of tort, locality alone determines the matter of jurisdiction; and the fact that a vessel inflicting an injury on another is engaged in the domestic trade of a state, or in navigating its internal waters, does not affect the jurisdiction of admiralty. Being on the navigable waters of the United States, admiralty jurisdiction attaches. Neither the great lakes, nor the navi

The Genesee Chief, 12 How. 443; Parmelee v. The Charles Mears, Newb. 197; United States v. Rogers, 150 U. S. 249.

The Genesee Chief, 12 How. 443; The Flora, 1 Biss. 29; Hine v. Trevor, 4 Wall. 555; The Eagle, 8 Wall. 15.

Admiralty will entertain jurisdiction of a suit in rem against a vessel for collision when seized on the St. Lawrence river within the boundaries of the state of New York. The East, 9 Ben. 76.

The East river, so called, is not a river within the meaning of the law, but is a strait, and must be classed among the coast waters of the country. The Garden City, 26 Fed. R. 766.

Long Island Sound is a part of the high seas. The Martha Anne, Olc. 18. So, also, is the mouth of a tidal river a mile and a half wide. United States v. Smith, 3 Wash. 78.

3 Ex parte Boyer, 109 U. S. 629.

gable rivers of the United States, are to be considered as highways of the states which they adjoin, or through which they pass, but are to be considered as national highways, subject, in some particular instances, to state regulations of a police nature. They are as much of a national highway as are the high seas, and admiralty jurisdiction attaches to the same extent.1

Sec. 8. Inland lakes and waters.- Inland lakes lying wholly within the limits of a state, having no navigable outlet leading beyond the borders of the state, are not "navigable waters of the United States" within the meaning of the constitutional grant of admiralty jurisdiction, and suits to enforce obligations arising thereon cannot be enforced in the federal courts of admiralty jurisdiction; state courts having exclusive jurisdiction in such cases.'

Sec. 9. Canals.- Whenever a stream, either artificial or natural, forms by itself or its connections a highway over which commerce may be carried on with other states or foreign countries in the usual manner, its waters are within the jurisdiction of admiralty."

When canals connect with navigable waters, they become and are navigable waters of the United States so far as the jurisdiction of admiralty courts is concerned; and though wholly within the boundaries of a state and subject to the

1 The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557; Veazie v. Moor, 14 How. 568; The Belfast, 7 Wall. 624; In re Long Island N. S. P. & F. Transportation Co., 5 Fed. R. 599.

2 Stapp v. The Steamboat Clyde, 43 Minn. 192; United States v. B. & H. Co. Ferry Co., 21 Fed. R. 331; The Bolivar, Olc. 474; Allen v. Newberry, 21 How. 244; The Troy, 4 Blatch. 355.

Where the liability of the owners of a vessel arose out of a collision on waters which were navi

4

gable highways of commerce, it was held that with respect to such tort admiralty has jurisdiction; and the fact that the vessel was usually employed solely in domestic trade in Maryland waters, and not in foreign or interstate commerce, was immaterial. The Tolchester, 42 Fed. R. 180.

3 Jackson v. The Magnolia, 20 How. 296; The Daniel Ball, 10 Wall. 557.

4 Ex parte Boyer, 109 U. S. 629.