In Martin v. Waddell's Lessee (1842) 41 U.S. 367, the Supreme Court resolved a property dispute over who had the right to harvest oysters in a certain oyster bed in New Jersey. (Id.at 407.) The plaintiff claimed the tideland by tracing title back to the charters given to the Duke of York in the late 1600s and his subsequent grant to the 24 Proprietors of East New Jersey. The defendant claimed his right under an 1824 New Jersey law allowing him to lease oyster land from the state. (Id. at 408.) To resolve the case, the Court had to determine who held title to the oyster bed: the plaintiff or the State of New Jersey. The Supreme Court concluded that New Jersey held title, reasoning that the title to land under navigable water was not a private property right retained by the Proprietors, but one of the royal rights held by the sovereign in public trust for the benefit of the community. (Id. at 413-16.) As such, it was one of the rights surrendered to Queen Anne by the Proprietors in 1702, and then passed to the State of New Jersey at the time of the Revolution. (Id. at 415-16.) The practical effect of Martin was to establish that the original thirteen states held clear title to their navigable waters and tidelands, absent the use of clear and especial words suggesting otherwise, in a pre-Revolution grant of land. (Id. at 411-12.) In that case, the Supreme Court held against the private exclusive use of an owner even though that use did not reach the level of interference with public rights presented by outright private ownership of public trust tidelands and waters. The Supreme Court sustained the denial of a claim of exclusive right to fish for oysters in Raritan Bay, New Jersey, based on a charter granted in 1664 by Charles II to his brother, the Duke of York to colonize the area. The decision stated that in the United States, such a grant "must therefore manifestly be tried and determined by different principles from those which apply to grants of the British crown, when the title is held by a single individual in trust for the whole nation." In the United States, since the Revolution, the people as sovereign "hold the absolute right to all their navigable waters and the soils under them for their own common use, subject only to the rights . . . surrendered by the Constitution to the general government." (Id. at 410.) It was said that when the American Revolution took place, "the people of each state became themselves sovereign; and in that character hold the absolute right to all their navigable waters, and the soils under them, for their own common use, subject only to the rights since surrendered by the constitution to the government." In sum: Martin v. Waddell involved a dispute over navigable tidelands in the State of New Jersey. The proper interpretation of a charter of Charles II to his brother, the Duke of York was at issue. The United States Supreme Court stated (p. 410): "In such cases, whatever does not pass by the grant, still remains in the crown for the benefit and advantage of the whole community. Grants of that description lands bounded by "rivers, bays and arms of the sea" are therefore construed strictly - and it will not be presumed that he intended to part from any portion of the public domain the tidelands, unless clear and especial words are used to denote it. . . ."