[116] Minnesota v. Probate Court, 309 U.S. 270 (1940).
[117] Lanzetta v. New Jersey, 306 U.S. 451 (1939).
[118] 262 U.S. 390 (1923).
[119] 268 U.S. 510 (1925).
[120] Ibid. 534. Even this statement was a dictum. Inasmuch as only corporations and no parents were party litigants, the Court in fact disposed of the case on the ground that the corporations were being deprived of their "property" without due process of law.
[121] Waugh v. Mississippi University, 237 U.S. 589, 596-597 (1915).
[122] Hamilton v. University of California, 293 U.S. 245, 262 (1934). See also p. [768].
[123] 16 Wall. 36 (1873).
[124] 165 U.S. 578, 589.—Herein liberty of contract was defined as follows: "The liberty mentioned in that [Fourteenth] Amendment means not only the right of the citizen to be free from the mere physical restraint of his person, as by incarceration, but the term is deemed to embrace the right of the citizen to be free in the enjoyment of all his faculties; to be free to use them in all lawful ways; to live and work where he will; to earn his livelihood by any lawful calling; to pursue any livelihood or avocation, and for that purpose to enter into all contracts which may be proper, necessary and essential to his carrying out to a successful conclusion the purposes above mentioned."
[125] 236 U.S. 1, 14 (1915).