RIVER. A natural stream of water flow ing betwixt banks or walls in a bed of con siderable depth and width, being so called. whether its current sets always one way or flows and reflows with the tide. Woolrych, Wat. 40 ; State v. Gilmanton, 14 N. H. 467.
A body of flowing water ; a running stream of no specific dimensions, larger than a brook or rivulet, and pent on either side by walls or banks. Board of Com'rs v. Castet ter, 7 Ind. App. 309, 33 N. E. 986, 34 N. E. 687.
Overflow waters that continue in a general course, although without defined banks, back into the water course from which they start ed or into another water course, do not be come surface waters, but remain a part of the water course ; Town of Jefferson v. Hicks, 23 Okl. 684, 102 Pac. 79, 24 L. R. A. (N. S.) 214.
Rivers are either public or private. Pub lic rivers are divided into navigable and non-navigable,—the distinction being that the former flow and reflow with the tide, while the latter do not. Both are' navigable in the popular sense of the term ; Peyroux v. Howard, 7 Pet, (U. S.) 324, 8 L. Ed. 700; Com. v. Chapin, 5 Pick. (Mass.) 199, 16 Am. Dec. 386 ; Com'rs of Canal Fund v. Kemp shall, 26 Wend. (N. Y.) 404 ; 4 B. & C. 602.
At common law, the bed or soil of all rivers subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, to the extent of such ebb and flow, be longs to the crown ; and the bed or soil of all rivers above the ebb and flow of the tide, or in which there is no tidal effect, be longs to the riparian proprietors, each own ing to the centre or thread,—ad filmy, aquce, which see,—where the opposite banks be long to different persons; Daveis 149; 5 B. & Ald. 268. In this country the common law has been recognized as the law of many of the states,—the state succeeding to the right of the crown ; Ingraham v. Wilkinson, 4 Pick. (Mass.) 268, 16 Am. Dec. 342; Com'rs of Canal Fund v. Kempshall, 26 Wend. (N. Y.) 404 ; Brown v. Chadbourne, 31 Me. 9, 50 Am. Dec. 641; Adams v. Pease, 2 Conn. 481; Stuart v. Clark's Lessee, 2 Swan (Tenn.) 9, 58 Am. Dec. 49 ; Walker v. Board, 16 Ohio, 540, See Illinois Cent. R. Co. v. Illinois, 146 U. S. 387, 13 Sup. Ct. 110, 36
L. Ed. 1018. But in some states the common law distinction founded on the tide is not recognized, and it is held that the owner ship, of the bed or soil of all rivers navi gable for any useful purpose of trade or agriculture, whether tidal or fresh-water, is in the state; Shrunk v. Nay. Co., 14 S. & R. (Pa.) 71; Collins v. Benbury, 25 N. C. 277, 38 Am. Dec. 722; Cates Ex'rs v. Wadling ton, 1 McCord (S. C.) 580, 10 Am. Dec. 699; McManus v. Carmichael, 3 Ia. 1; Com'rs of 'Homochitto River v. Withers, 29 Miss. 21, 64 Am. Dec. 126 ; Saunders v. R. Co., 71 Hun (N. Y.) 153, 23 N. Y. Supp. 927. See Shively v Bowlby, 152 U. S. 1, 14 Sup. Ct. 54S, 38 L. Ed. 331. At common law, the ownership of the crown extends to high-water mark ; Ang. Tide-Wat. 69; 3 B. & Ald. 967; and in several states this rule has been followed; Gould v. R. Co., 12 Barb. (N. Y.) 616; Bell v. Gough, 23 N. J. L. 624; Com. v. Alger, 7 Cush. (Mass.) 53; Simons v. French, 25 Conn. 346 ; New Jersey Zinc & Iron Co. v. Canal & Banking Co., 44 N. J. Eq. 398, 15 Atl. 227, 1 L. R. A. 133; Hobo ken v. R. Co., 124 U. S. 656, 8 Sup. Ct. 643, 31 L. Ed. 543 ; hut in others it has been modified by extending the ownership of the riparian proprietor, subject to the servitudes of navigation and fishery, to low-water mark; Lehigh Valley R. Co. v. Trone, 28 Pa. 206 ; Thurman v. Morrison, 14 B. Monr. (Ky.) 367 ; Lessee of Blanchard v. Porter, 11 Ohio, 138; Webb v. Demopolis, 95 Ala. 116, 13 South. 289, 21 L. R. A. 62; unless these de cisions may be explained as applying to fresh water rivers ; 2 Smith, Lead. Cas. 224.
In Wisconsin the riparian ownership ex tends to the thread of the stream, subject, if such stream be navigable, to the right of the public to its use as a public highway for the passage of vessels; Kaukauna Water Power Co. v. Canal Co., 142 U. S. 254, 12 Sup. Ct. 173, 35 L. Ed. 1004. In Michigan, a grant of land bounded by a stream, wheth er navigable or not, carries with it the bed of the stream to the centre line thereof ; Grand Rapids & I. R. Co. v. Butler, 159 U. S. 87, 15 Sup. Ct. 991, 40 L. Ed. 85.