Eldridge

[87] delivered the opinion of the Court.

In the plan of the City of San Francisco, the survey into blocks, lots and streets, extended into the tide waters in front of the city, the object of which was to reach a sufficient depth of water, on the land side, for the convenience of shipping. It was necessarily anticipated that the water lots would be filled up to a level suitable for building or land carriage. That this was perfectly legitimate, in the establishment of a seaport town, is so self-evident that it needs no argument to prove it.

The plaintiff obtained by purchase his lot, with a full knowledge of the plan of the .city. The right of the owners of water lots to fill them up with earth, for the purpose of improvement and use, was practically admitted by him in filling up that part of his own lot and the street in front of it, which was in the water.

It is not material to inquire as to the first authority for the plan of the city, as extended into the water. It is sufficient that by the Act of 26th of March, 1861, this plan was recognized by the State, and property in the lots covered by tide water, vested in individuals. The right of the State to do this has been…