is held in private proprietorship, and under this pretended license the whole might be invaded, and, for all useful purposes, destroyed, no matter how little remunerative the product of the mining.  The entry might be made at all seasons, whether the land was under cultivation or not, and without reference to its condition, whether covered with orchards, vineyards, gardens, or otherwise.  Under such a state of things, the proprietor would never be secure in his possessions, and without security there would be little development, for the incentive to improvement would be wanting.  What value would there be to a title in one man, with a right of invasion in the whole world?  And what property would the owner possess in mineral land—­the same being in fact to him poor and valueless just in proportion to the actual richness and abundance of its products?  There is something shocking to all our ideas of the rights of property in the proposition that one man may invade the possessions of another, dig up his fields and gardens, cut down his timber, and occupy his land, under the pretence that he has reason to believe there is gold under the surface, or if existing, that he wishes to extract and remove it.”

At a later day the court took up the doctrine, that the precious metals belonged to the State by virtue of her sovereignty, and exploded it.  The question arose in Moore vs.  Smaw, reported in 17th California, and in disposing of it, speaking for the court, I said:  “It is undoubtedly true that the United States held certain rights of sovereignty over the territory which is now embraced within the limits of California, only in trust for the future State, and that such rights at once vested in the new State upon her admission into the Union.  But the ownership of the precious metals found in public or private lands was not one of those rights.  Such ownership stands in no different relation to the sovereignty of a State than that of any other property which is the subject of barter and sale.  Sovereignty is a term used to express the supreme political authority of an independent State or Nation.  Whatever rights are essential to the existence of this authority are rights of sovereignty.  Thus the right to declare war, to make treaties of peace, to levy taxes, to take private property for public uses, termed the right of eminent domain, are all rights of sovereignty, for they are rights essential to the existence of supreme political authority.  In this country, this authority is vested in the people, and is exercised through the joint action of their federal and State governments.  To the federal government is delegated the exercise of certain rights or powers of sovereignty; and with respect to sovereignty, rights and powers are synonymous terms; and the exercise of all other rights of sovereignty, except as expressly prohibited, is reserved to the people of the respective States, or vested by them in their local governments.  When we say, therefore, that a State of the Union