50 FEDERAL Rsroarmn.
venienced by it; in nne, it does not concern them. For all the pur-
poses of removal, and jurisdiction to hear and determine the cause,
the original is equivalent to the copy; and in filing it the defendant
` has substantially complied with the statute. It is not unlikely that
the original papers were sent here by mistake ofthe clerk; and, if such
is the case, and the clerk shall apply to have the error corrected, it
will be proper to allow the originals to be withdrawn from the files of
this court, and copies thereof dled in their place. There is no claim
that this court has jurisdiction of this case by reason of the citizen-
ship of the parties. It was removed on the ground that it arose
under a law of the United States, and therefore it is not necessary to
further consider the third point made in support of the motion to re-
mand.
A statement of the facts contained in the proceedings is necessary
to the consideration of the second point.
The plaintiffs allege in their complaint that on March 12, 1860,
12 certain parcels of land, containing in all 877.67 acres, and de-
scribed therein as being lots and subdivisions of certain sections,
· according to the public surveys, situate in Marion county, and con-
stituting ,"a part of what is known as Lake Labish," (evidently a
mere early phonetic spelling of the French La Bitchc or Deer lake,)
were, and still are, “swamp and overflowed," within the meaning of
the act of congress of that date, and as such were by the same granted
to the state of Oregon; that in pursuance of an act of the legislative
assembly of Oregon, entitled "An act providing for the selection and
sale of the swamp and overflowed lands belonging to the state of
Oregon," approved October 26, 1870, the board of commissioners
for the sale of school and university lands, on November 11, 1871,
duly selected said lands as inuriug to the state of Oregon under
said act of March 12, 1860; that on April 9, 1872, said board duly
sold said lands to the plaintiff, John F. Miller, "as swamp and over-
flowed," he then paying 20 per ceutum of the purchase price, and re-
ceiving from "said board his certificate of the purchase of the same,"
who afterwards sold an interest therein to the plaintiff, W. P. Mil-
ler; that in 1882 the selection of said lands as aforesaid was ap-
proved by an agent of the United States "specially appointed for the
purpose of examining and reporting upon the character of the lands
claimed by the state as swamp and overfiowed, " but that patents have
not been issued to the state for the same; that the defendant is the
owner of a grist and saw mill on Big Pudding river, in said county,
and known as "'1‘he Parkersville Mills;" that said mills are near Lit-
tle Pudding river, “a constant stream" running through a portion of
said lands, “in a clearly defined and distinct channel, where it has
been accustomed to run from time imrnemorial, and near the north-
eastern extremity of said lands empties into Big Pudding river, a
V short distance above the defendants mills;" that near said point the
defendant " wrongfully and unlawfully maintains and keeps a dam