ART. 54] RIPARIAN RIGHTS. 1333

The proprietor's right to improve out into a river, until actually availed
of, is subject to the right of the United States to use the sell under the
water in aid of navigation without such proprietor's consent and without
compensation. The privilege conferred by this section must be exercised
subject to the public right of navigation and the usual necessary aids thereto.
Hawk ins Point Light-House Case, 39 Fed. 87.

When waters are "navigable." No State can restrict the jurisdiction
which the admiralty would otherwise have. Maryland v. Miller, 180 Fed.
804.

What kind of improvements can be made? Until the improvements are
made, the adjacent owner has no interest in the land under the water, except
a right to make the improvements. Western Maryland T. R. Co. v. Balti-
more, 100 Md. 565; Hess v. Muir, 65 Md. 596 (involving the bedding of
oysters); Maryland v. Miller, 180 Fed. 804.

The rights secured by this section and sections 47 and 49, are valuable,
and if invaded or their enjoyment obstructed, the owner is entitled to the
usual redress. Garitee v. Baltimore, 53 Md. 432; Goodsell v. Lawson, 42
Md. 371. See also, B. & (). R. R. Co. v. Chase, 43 Md. 23.

Where improvements are extended beyond the original city limits, the
latter are also extended and such improvements are taxable. Western
Maryland T. R. Co. v. Baltimore, 106 Md. 565.

The power of the legislature to pass this and the preceding section,

referred to by way of example. Phipps v. State, 22 Md. 389.

in a case where the ownership of a wharf was in question, this section
was hold to have no application. Albert v. State, use of Ryan, 66 Md. 336.

The rights conferred by this section are in no sense analagous to the
privilege granted by article 72, section 47 (dealing with private oyster
beds). Handy v. Maddox, 85 Md. 552.

For cases dealing with the subject of this section prior to its adoption,
see Baltimore v. McKim. 3 Bl. 453; Casey v. Inloes, 1 Gill, 432; Hammond

v. Inloes. 4 Md. 173; Wilson v. Inloes, 11 G. & J. 359; Giraud v. Hughes, 1
G. & J. 265; B. & O. R. R. Co. v. Chase, 43 Md. 23.

Cited but not construed in Spencer v. Patten, 84 Md. 426; Hill v. United
States, 149 U. S. 593; Ramstead v. The William H. Brinsfield, 39 Fed. 215.

See art. 98, sections 21 and 22.

1904, art. 54, sec. 49. 1888, art. 54, sec. 46. 1862, ch. 129, sec. 39.
49. No patent hereafter issued out of the land office shall impair
or affect the rights of riparian proprietors, as explained and declared in
the two preceding sections; and no patent shall hereafter issue for land
covered by navigable waters.

A patent was refused on appeal by virtue of this section, although all
the proceedings were had and the patent granted below, prior to its adop-
tion. This section is of public interest, and the courts will act on it
whether the parties rely upon it or not. The last clause of this section
applies to all lands below high-water mark. Day v. Day, 22 Md. 539;
Patterson v. Gelston, 23 Md. 445. See also, Garitee v. Baltimore, 53 Md. 433.
In view of the last clause of this section, adverse possession for twenty
years—prior to 1890—of land covered by navigable water, confers no title
as against the State. Sellers v. Sellers, 77 Md. 151.

The only effect of the last clause of this section is to restrict the powers
of the commissioner of the land office; it is not inconsistent with a license
to plant oysters. Hess v. Muir, 65 Md. 597; Phipps v. State. 22 Md. 380.

For cases dealing with the subject of this section prior to its adoption, see
Patterson v. Gelston, 23 Md. 447; Baltimore v. McKim, 3 Bl. 453; Chapman
7. Hoskins, 2 Md. Ch. 485; Ridgely v. Johnson, 1 Bl. 316, note (f).

Cited but not construed in Spencer v. Patten, 84 Md. 426; Hill v. United
States, 149 U. S. 593; Ranstead v. The William H. Brlnsfleld, 39 Fed. 215.
See notes to sec. 48.