—the court held a waterway was navigable if it was "wide and deep enough for sea vessels to navigate.., without any obstruction."

Some state courts came early to the conclusion that a State holds presumptive title to navigable waters whether or not the waters are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide.

By that rule Albemarle and Pamlico sounds, which are inland seas, would not be deemed navigable waters, and would be the subject of private property.

However, it is not whether the waterway itself is natural or artificial but, rather, "[w] ater that is navigable in its natural state flows without diminution or obstruction."

There can be no essential difference for the purposes of navigation, whether the water be salt or fresh, or whether the tides regularly flow and ebb or not….

—"'the North Carolina Supreme Court determined that the ebb-and-flow test was inapplicable to North Carolina because of the" great length of [its] rivers, extending far into the interior, and the sand-bars and other obstructions at their mouths.

As discussed previously, this Court already had unequivocally indicated that the lunar tides test had never been a part of the common law to be applied for determining navigability in North Carolina.

—“navigable waters” as found in the entry-and-grant statute included inland non-tidal waters as well as waters affecetd by the ebb and flow of the tide.

And the above rules apply without regard to the magnitude or importance of the river whose bed or islands are in question

The statutes of that state, at different periods, have either limited grants of land bounded on navigable waters to high-water mark, or have permitted owners of the shore to make entries of the land in front, as far as deep water, for the purpose of a wharf; and any owner of the shore appears to have the right to wharf out, subject to such regulations as the legislature may …