Summary

Portrait of Morrison Waite Morrison Waite Fox v. Cincinnati — Opinion of the Court

That the State by its grant to the city actually abandoned the canal at the point in question cannot be denied. The use of the property as a public street is clearly inconsistent with all ideas of navigation by water. The single question we have to consider is whether there is anything in the lease under which Fox claims which prevents the State from making such an abandonment without compensation to him.
Source: Wikisource

Portrait of Morrison Waite Morrison Waite Fox v. Cincinnati — Opinion of the Court

This included water passing round the locks from one level to another; but it was expressly provided that no power should be leased or sold, except such as should accrue from surplus water, 'after supplying the full quantity necessary for the purposes of navigation.' The laws also required that every lease or grant of power should contain a reservation of the right to resume the privilege, in whole or in part, whenever it might be deemed necessary for the purposes of navigation.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature