Pueblo Lands—Void Deed by Tide-Land Commissioners.—A deed by the tide-land commissioners to lands the boundary of which is not carried below the shore-line of Mission Bay at ordinary high tide, and which are contained in the pueblo patent to the city and county of San Francisco, is void, and conveys no title whatever.

Id.—Authority of Federal Decision.—The decision of the supreme court of the United States, upon writ of error to this court, upon the question of federal jurisdiction, that the state had no title to lands included in the patent of the United States to pueblo lands of the city and county of San Francisco, must he regarded as of binding authority on this court.

Id.—City not Estopped.—Acts consisting merely in the participation of the mayor of the city of San Francisco as a member of the state hoard of tide-land commissioners, in the survey by which the tide-lands were excluded from the city, and in the approval of the survey and of maps or surveys according therewith by several ordinances,—all of which were prior to the confirmation of the city's title,—cannot constitute an estoppel upon the city.

Id.—Title Belied upon—Other Questions Immaterial—Findings.— Where the -only title relied upon by the appellants consists of deeds of the tide-land commissioners to pueblo lands included in the patent of the United States to the city, the question whether the description in the complaint, or in a so-called possessory or pre-emption claim under the law of the state, which has no application to lands of the city, coincides with the description in the deeds relied upon, and the question whether the city is estopped by a former decision not contained in the record, are immaterial. No findings need be made upon any title other than that derived from the state.

Id.—Possessory Claim—Evidence.—The possession of one claiming under the Possessory Act of the state, cannot he extended by construction to the boundaries of his claim within the city limits, and declarations of the claimant as to the nature and extent of his possession under such claim were properly excluded.

Id.—attack upon City's Title—Flow of Tide—Evidence.—It was not error to exclude evidence designed to attack the city’s title under the patent from the United States to pueblo lands by showing the flow of the tide over the land in question, or instructions of the surveyor-general charged with the survey of such laud.

Id.—Cube op Error—Judicial Notice—Admission op Patent.—Any error of the court in assuming to take judicial notice of the patent and its bounds was cured by admission of the patent in evidence. Id.—Dismissal as to Dependants not Appearing—Bevtew upon Appeal.—An order dismissing the action as to defendants not appearing is not involved in an appeal from a judgment in favor of defendants who appeared.

Id.—Action to Quiet Title—Pleading—Denials op Answer—Findings.—In a suit to quiet title, as in other suits, a denial of the allegations of the complaint is a sufficient answer, and a finding upon such answer, adverse to the plaintiff, is a sufficient finding. The defendant is not called upon to do more than negative the plaintiff's cause of action, unless by alleging title he wishes to avail himself of a jury trial, or unless he seeks to avail himself of an equitable title against the legal title of the plaintiff, which he must specifically plead.