WI: The Mormons stayed in Missouri

Basically what it says on the tin. IOTL 1838, the Governor of Missouri expelled members of the LDS Church from his state. But what If he didn't? How would this affect Missouri and US History, as well as the Civil War?
 
Joseph Smith gets murdered six years sooner, Brigham Young gets to Utah earlier, the state of Deseret achieves independence by the time of the Mexican American War.
 
It’s not like they weren’t trying to stay. They left because it was just impossible. Same with leaving Nauvoo. If they try to stay, a huge mob would kill them all, end of story.
 
The Mormons moved so much because they made enemies. When they left Nauvoo, different groups went different directions. Some went to Wisconsin. Joseph Smith's heirs ended up back in Independence, Missouri, close to the region from which they were expelled. They were peaceful and nobody bothered them, a testimony that they were disliked for their conduct, not their belief system. Today, the Reorganized LDS, or Community of Christ as it is now called, is a relatively obscure faith. It was Brigham Young who took the largest group to Utah and transformed them into one of the most accountable and industrious faith groups anywhere. Across the divide, they had no established farmers or river traffic with which to interact, only members of their own faith. The rest is history, and a very important chapter in the settlement of the West. Had Brigham Young failed or disappeared on his quest, we might expect his group would have dispersed back through the Midwest. The result would have been profound. The course of the transcontinental railroad followed the Mormon path of settlement. You might see a delay. The Rocky Mountain region might have fewer states.
 
Joseph Smith gets murdered six years sooner, Brigham Young gets to Utah earlier, the state of Deseret achieves independence by the time of the Mexican American War.
They didn't want independence though, the Deseret proposal was a proposal to become a state, not to become independent.
 
They didn't want independence though, the Deseret proposal was a proposal to become a state, not to become independent.
That's because the United States had acquired Utah via the Mexican American War. If the the Mormons had been under Mexican jurisdiction for a few years longer, they would have undoubtedly pulled a Texas. As it was, they were practically never really under Mexican rule. It would have been much easier to secede from Mexico than the U.S.

Make no mistake, if the Mormons had been able to set up their own theocracy, they would have. They apparently didn't count on the U.S. acquiring Utah so soon, which made independence unattainable.
 
Basically what it says on the tin. IOTL 1838, the Governor of Missouri expelled members of the LDS Church from his state. But what If he didn't? How would this affect Missouri and US History, as well as the Civil War?
I think Executive Order 44 is pretty clear on what happens next.
 
That's because the United States had acquired Utah via the Mexican American War. If the the Mormons had been under Mexican jurisdiction for a few years longer, they would have undoubtedly pulled a Texas. As it was, they were practically never really under Mexican rule. It would have been much easier to secede from Mexico than the U.S.

Make no mistake, if the Mormons had been able to set up their own theocracy, they would have. They apparently didn't count on the U.S. acquiring Utah so soon, which made independence unattainable.
So the US just forcibly annexes their unrecognized nation when they invade Mexico instead. Changes little except likely seeing some of them massacred...ok, so still not much changes.
 
That's because the United States had acquired Utah via the Mexican American War. If the the Mormons had been under Mexican jurisdiction for a few years longer, they would have undoubtedly pulled a Texas. As it was, they were practically never really under Mexican rule. It would have been much easier to secede from Mexico than the U.S.

Make no mistake, if the Mormons had been able to set up their own theocracy, they would have. They apparently didn't count on the U.S. acquiring Utah so soon, which made independence unattainable.
If they pulled a Texas, that would also mean they would become a state. Manifest Destiny Applied to the entire west, not just Mexico
 
Utah, if there no Mormons, or any large number of them, would either become a much more obscure state with a much smaller population (like the Dakotas), or it won't even be a state, and given to Nevada, or Colorado.

Also no Mormonism in Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia so the Pacific would have been shaped by different religions.

You may also butterfly John Moses Browning with so no Browning 9mm pistol, no BAR and no Browning LMG.
 
By the 1890's, statehood was inevitable so they had little choice but to join. Now, if we look back to 1846, the outcome of the Mexican War was not a foregone conclusion. Texas and California could have been separate republics and so could Utah, or Deseret. President Buchanan sent out troops to overthrow the Mormon territorial government, but the pending Civil War forced the army to retreat. The fact is they did establish a theocracy. Though geographically isolated by distance, railroads brought not only settlers but interaction. Keep in mind that Utah did not become a state until 1896.
 
Utah, if there no Mormons, or any large number of them, would either become a much more obscure state with a much smaller population (like the Dakotas), or it won't even be a state, and given to Nevada, or Colorado.

Also no Mormonism in Polynesia, Melanesia, and Micronesia so the Pacific would have been shaped by different religions.

You may also butterfly John Moses Browning with so no Browning 9mm pistol, no BAR and no Browning LMG.
Because of the lower population Utah would be a bigger state. Because Utah was in fact supposed to be larger. Anti-Mormon sentiment ended up causing Utah to lose western slices to Nevada TWICE. Paradoxically it is Nevada that would be smaller if Mormonism didn't exist; and silver is the only reason Nevada is not going to be a part of Utah.
 
So the US just forcibly annexes their unrecognized nation when they invade Mexico instead. Changes little except likely seeing some of them massacred...ok, so still not much changes.
You raise the spectre of the Mormons siding with the Mexicans in the war, and not the Mormons of OTL, who had just gotten to Utah, but a Mormon settlement nearly a decade old. Everything moves forward a decade with Joseph Smith's early death. They could have formed a formidable force on the flank of a U.S. invasion into the Southwest. A peace treaty could at least temporarily have granted Deseret independence.

Mormonism unfettered easily had the potential to become a significant political force in the West. In OTL, they never got that chance.
 
Mormonism unfettered easily had the potential to become a significant political force in the West. In OTL, they never got that chance.
The LDS faith was established in 1830. They would spend the next decade-and-a-half settling near established populations with the intent of recruiting converts. You would need a POD that causes Joseph Smith and Brigham Young to migrate west much earlier. So, when they were opposed in Missouri in 1838, instead of going to Nauvoo, they go west. A possibility would be a nation on the west coast, at the end of the Oregon Trail, perhaps towards Northern California. They would have to do it before claims over the territory are settled with Britain in 1846 and before the end of the Mexican War. Would they have the time, people and resources? Now, Mormons out there are welcome to correct me, but in the book "Nightfall at Nauvoo," Joseph Smith does not condone polygamy until the Nauvoo period, right? Keep in mind, early exodus west does not come with a surplus of women unless they take Native Americans, changing the racial composition of the community.
 
The LDS faith was established in 1830. They would spend the next decade-and-a-half settling near established populations with the intent of recruiting converts. You would need a POD that causes Joseph Smith and Brigham Young to migrate west much earlier. So, when they were opposed in Missouri in 1838, instead of going to Nauvoo, they go west. A possibility would be a nation on the west coast, at the end of the Oregon Trail, perhaps towards Northern California. They would have to do it before claims over the territory are settled with Britain in 1846 and before the end of the Mexican War. Would they have the time, people and resources? Now, Mormons out there are welcome to correct me, but in the book "Nightfall at Nauvoo," Joseph Smith does not condone polygamy until the Nauvoo period, right? Keep in mind, early exodus west does not come with a surplus of women unless they take Native Americans, changing the racial composition of the community.

This seems like a very good TL idea.
 
If we move the Mormons to the Pacific Northwest circa 1840, there are other consequences. Without a railroad to accelerate settlement for a longer time, the faith might propagate to Native Americans. After all, the Book of Mormon does say Jesus Christ visited the continent. Natives were considered "chosen people." The problem is, Manifest Destiny will spread the United States to the west coast, and the racist treatment of Native Americans is not a pleasant part of history.
 
A tidbit that could be interesting to look into is this from OTL- an obscure Illinois lawyer named Abraham Lincoln was one of the original people who supported the Mormons coming to Illinois. Could we see this in an ATL turn into something a bit more interesting in history. A Mormon Abe Lincoln perhaps?
 
Top