M OST LAWS are the result of social processes; that is, they are crystallized group expressions of what many people want or think they want. When the group resorts to the legal media to accomplish its end, frequently other laws-perhaps they are legalized traditions and customs-interfere, making the desired accomplishments impossible. This article is written to give an example of a socio-legal process which might be paralleled many times. Since the article has been written with this particular approach, the story of the Division of Subsistence Homesteads, which affords the illustrative material, is carried only to its disbanding in June, 1935, with no attention being given to the subsequent history of particular projects under the Resettlement Administration. The concluding part of the discussion intentionally points out what is needed since by so doing the thwarting of a desired program is the better illustrated, though on the surface the last five paragraphs may seem to contribute little to the socio-legal process that is the heart of the paper. The establishment of the Division of Subsistence Homesteads under section 208 of the National Recovery Act is an excellent example of a socio-legal process: the law resulted from the group urges to relieve distress, to put people to work and to place on a sound economic base a limited number of families who normally have low incomes; the accomplishments were defeated by legal technicalities and governmental methods. Moreoever, when the Federal system of operations or a legal opinion (sound or unsound) stop constructive action, the public knows nothing about it, though the longtime consequences and ultimate losses may be more serious than an adverse decision of the Supreme Court. The story of the Division of Subsistence Homesteads. also. strik-