About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline

LOG IN
LOG IN


2001 Utah L. Rev. 581 (2001)
Punishing the Saints for Their Peculiar Institution: Congress on the Constitutional Dilemmas

handle is hein.journals/utahlr2001 and id is 591 raw text is: Punishing the Saints for Their Peculiar Institution: Congress on the Constitutional Dilemmas L. Rex Sears I. Historical Background ..................................... 582 II. The Formation of Utah Territory ............................. 585 Ill. Polygamy ............................................... 587 IV. Synopsis of Federal Polygamy Legislation ...................... 589 A. Homestead Bill of 1854 .................................. 589 B. M orrill Act of 1862 ..................................... 589 C. Cullom Bill of 1870 .................................... 590 D. Edmunds Act of 1882 .................................. 592 E. Edmunds-Tucker Act of 1887 ............................. 593 F. Enabling Act of 1894 ................................... 595 G. Challenges to Utah Representatives ........................ 595 V. Constitutional Debates ..................................... 595 A. Congressional Authority to Punish Polygamy: Homestead and M orrill ............................................... 595 1. Free Exercise .................................... 596 2. Congressional Power to Legislate for the Territories ...... 601 B. Attainder and Punishment: Homestead, Cullom and Edmunds .... 606 1. Discriminatory Land Grants: The Homestead Bill of 1854.. 606 2. Office Holding and Suffrage: The Cullom Bill (1870) and the Edmunds Act (1882) ....................... 608 3. Disincorporation and Forfeiture: Morrill and Edmunds- Tucker ........................................ 617 a. Disincorporation .............................. 617 b. Forfeiture ................................... 621 C. Equal Footing: The Enabling Act .......................... 625 D. Exclusion and Expulsion: The Cannon, Roberts and Smoot Cases ............................................... 632 1. George Q. Cannon, Delegate-Elect .................... 632 2. B.H. Roberts, Representative-Elect .................... 640 3. Reed Smoot, Senator from Utah ...................... 647 4. Representation and Enforcement of the Enabling Act ..... 650 5. Cannon, Roberts and Smoot in Respective Context ....... 654 *Attorney, Workman, Nydegger & Seeley, Salt Lake City, Utah. Early versions of this essay were drafted during the winter and spring 1999 quarters, for the Constitution in Congress seminar at the Lav School of the University of Chicago. I am grateful to Professor David P. Currie for his direction, comments, and encouragement, as well as to the other members of the seminar.