Chief  .Justice  Waite:  The  question  to  be  determined  in  this
case  is  whether  the  general  assembly  of  Illinois  can,  under  the  limi-
tations upon  the  legislative  power  of  the  States  imposed  by  the  Con-
stitution of  the  United  States,  fix  by  law  the  maximum  of  charges
for  the  storage  of  grain  in  warehouses  at  Chicago  and  other  places  ,^  y^
in  the  State  having  not  less  than  one  hundred  thousand  inhabitants,
"  in  which  grain  is  stored  in  bulk,  and  in  which  the  grain  of  different
owners  is  mixed  together,  or  in  which  grain  is  stored  in  such  a  man-
ner that  the  identity  of  different  lots  or  parcels  cannot  be  accurately
preserved."

It  is  claimed  that  such  a  law  is  repugnant  —

To  that  part  of  Amendment  14  [to  the  Constitution  of  the  United
States]  which  ordains  that  no  State  shall  "  deprive  any  person  of  life,
liberty,  or  property,  without  due  procession  of  law,  nor  deny  to  any
person  within  its  jurisdiction  the  equal  protection  of  the  laws."

We  will  consider  the  last  of  these  objections  first.
Every  statute  is  presumed  to  be  constitutional.  The  courts  ought
not  to  declare  one  to  be  unconstitutional,  unless  it  is  clearly  so.  If
there  is  doubt,  the  expressed  will  of  the  legislature  should  be
sustained.
The  Constitution  contains  no  definition  of  the  word  "deprive,"  as
used  in  the  Fourteenth  Amendment.  To  determine  its  signification,
therefore,  it  is  necessary  to  ascertain  the  effect  which  usage  has
given  it,  when  employed  in  the  same  or  a  like  connection.
1  Ace.  :  Budd  v.  New  York,  143  U.  S.  517  ;  Brass  v.  Stoeser,  153  U.  S.  391.
1


2  INTRODUCTIOy.
