NATIONAL Contents Evolution of the Construction of the Due Process of Law Page 1 The Attempt of Congress to Promote and Protect Free Com- Mahommedan Law........ .........M. D. Redlich 61 Lobbying from a Legal Standpoint..........Earl J. Soelberg 76 Published Twice During the Academic Year by the NATIONAL UNIVERSITY Organized by Special Act of Congress The Law School 59th Year THREE-YEAR COURSE LEADING TO DEGREES OF LL. B. AND B. C. L. COURSES ALSO OFFERED LEADING TO THE DEGREES OF J. D., M. P. L., LL. M., S. J. D. AND D. C. L. CLASSES HELD AT HOURS CONVENIENT FOR EMPLOYED STUDENTS. For further information apply to the Secretary, NATIONAL UNIVERSITY LAW SCHOOL EVOLUTION OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DUE PROCESS OF LAW CLAUSES IN THE CONSTITUTION OF THE By JAMES HAMILTON LEWIS AND ALBERT H. PUTNEY (Professor of Constitutional Law at the While the Supreme Court of the United State has definitely and repeatedly declared that the "due process of law" clauses in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments are restrictions upon each of the departments of the Federal and State governments respectively, the guarantee that a person shall not be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law, means something very different when applied as a restriction upon the legislative department of the United States or of a State government, from what it means when it operates as a restriction upon the judicial department of either government. It has been stated by the Supreme Court that "due process of law" is incapable of definition, and it is appreciated by all lawyers how difficult it is to understand its scope and application. Much of the difficulty and confusion has arisen from the attempt to discuss two essentially different legal principles as if they were merely a single principle. It is confusing to lawyers to find the Supreme Court in some decisions2 stating that "due process of law" is merely 1 This is the advance publication of a section from a book in preparation by the authors on "The Construction and Reconstruction of the United States Constitution." 2 Murray v. Hoboken Land and Improvement Company, 18 Howard 272, 15 L. Ed. 372, decided February 19, 1856. |