Trouble preceded Joseph Smith’s arrival in Missouri. We’ve already discussed some of the issues between Mormons and Missourians in Jackson County, but things were about to get worse. Dr. Alex Baugh explains why Bishop Edward Partridge and W.W. Phelps were beaten severely and find out why Missourians expelled Mormons from Jackson County in 1833.
GT: Well, apparently the there were a bunch of mobs in Missouri that attacked the press.
Alex: Yeah, right, on the 20th.
GT: The 20th of?
Alex: Of July, I’m sorry, 1833. Okay, They tarred and feathered Partridge. He said, “Hey, now hold it.”
GT: Bishop Partridge.
Alex: Of course, they went to church leaders. He’s right there in Independence. He’s the figurehead leader of the church there and, they said, “We have some ultimatums here.” There were four or five ultimatums. Of course, he didn’t want to agree to any of them. He said, “Give us a little time.” They refused to allow that.
GT: They said, “Just get out.” They’d already destroyed the press.
Alex: They said, “If you don’t sign this, you’ll suffer some consequences.” He utterly refused. He asked for some time so they could consult with Joseph. They gave him no time. They hadn’t even given him time to consult with other leaders and other settlements in Jackson County, the Lyman Wight/prairie settlement at Colesville. He’s in Independence. He’s 9-10, 12 miles away from these other groups of Mormon settlers. He’s just given, “Sign or else.” He’s just saying, “No way.” So they took more aggressive action and went and got him and pulled him into the north part of the town square and northwest corner and tarred and feathered him and another Latter-day Saint and then went over to Phelps’s printing press, just walked away, and ransacked the building and destroyed the press and type. They were going to do some other damage to some of the local properties of the church, and fortunately, again, things kind of settled down. But three days later, the Mormon leaders agreed that they would leave–half of them would leave Jackson County by the first of January 1834. Then the rest would leave by the latter part of April 1834. So they were giving us time to get our crops in, sell their properties and so on. Unfortunately, and this could go into a whole ‘nother discussion, but immediately, of course, the church leaders dispatched messengers to Kirtland to try to find out what to do.
Following the Kirtland Banking Crisis in 1836, Joseph Smith finally came to Missouri, but dissent against his leadership followed him. Early leaders including Oliver Cowdery, the Whitmers, and even W.W. Phelps were disillusioned with his leadership. This led Sidney Rigdon to call out dissenters in his famous Salt Sermon. Dr. Alex Baugh tells us more about this tumultuous time. After getting kicked out of Jackson County, the state of Missouri created Caldwell County specifically for Mormons.
Alex: The county’is created and actually signed into law by Lilburn W. Boggs on the 29th of December 1836, passed both the House and the Senate to create this county for us.
GT: Now I’ve heard you call it the Mormon reservation.
Alex: Well, it kind of almost is. They’re kind of saying, “Okay, we’re going to block off this chunk of land for the Mormons. The expectation was, I mean, it was a gentleman’s agreement, but the idea was, if any Mormons come to Missouri, that’s where they gotta stay, that’s where they gotta live. But the point is, you can live anywhere you want. But the Latter-day Saints were grateful and I think I saw that as a temporary solution. But things deteriorate once we start getting up there, because number one, we begin moving into some other areas. We have some localities of pockets of Latter-day Saints elsewhere. Well, hold it, we weren’t supposed to do that. The thing that I think probably triggered the animosity again, was well, several things. But one of them is, of course, Joseph Smith, finally ends up, him and Sidney Rigdon and the First Presidency coming to Missouri. All this time, headquarters has been in Kirtland. Boy when Joseph arrives, he arrives March 14, 1838, him and Sidney. And boy, that sent a signal, “Mormons are here to stay, this is their homeland. They want to settle this as Zion. We’re not in Jackson County, but we’re there in Missouri now, and that’s the headquarters. So, they’re worried a little bit about again, political numbers, we start going outside. In May Joseph goes up to Daviess County, and declares that this one area is Adam-ondi-Ahman. We begin settling up there. We purchase land down in Carroll County, a little community called De Witt, start settling outside there, so that that causes problems as well. But Caldwell really worked out quite well for a couple of years there and we had our own government, we had our own–we even elected our own legislator to the Missouri legislature, John Corrill. We could form our own militia, and, boy, we can defend ourselves if we have to. The problem is, of course, the dissent that started in Kirtland comes to Missouri, and no sooner did Joseph Smith to get there, then, within a month, Oliver Cowdery is excommunicated, David Whitmer is excommunicated. Just right before he came, W.W. Phelps was excommunicated, John Whitmer. These men stay in Missouri, stay in Far West. They cause problems. McClellin is another one. Then, unfortunately, of course, we have the rise of the the Danite company, and these men decide that we’ve got to get rid of these guys. We got to cleanse the church. So these dissenters should not even be with us. We have the salt sermon of Sidney Rigdon, and it was a clear indication, “You’re not welcome here and we’ll help you move.” And where do they go?
…
Alex: June 17, I believe it was, he gives the Salt Sermon, 1838 and then that’s where he says, “You’re no longer welcome here. If the salt has lost its savor, it’s no good, but to be trodden under foot by men.”
GT: So he’s going after Mormon dissenters.
Alex: Right.
It is interesting to me that trouble occurred in Missouri before Joseph ever arrived. Mormons have had a history of bloc-voting, and I suspect that has a large reason why outsiders object. It didn’t help that Joseph excommunicated important church leaders in Missouri, but following the bank failure, I can understand why he might have clamped down hard on dissent. It both help and hurt his leadership. It was also the start of the Danites, but I think plenty of blame can be laid at Governor Boggs feet as well for his poor handling of the problems in Missouri. (Next week we will talk about the Extermination Order.) What are your thoughts on this early persecution of Mormons? Do you see problems on both sides?
Wheat & Tares 
Sidney Rigdon in the July 4, 1838 “Salt Sermon” went after more than Mormon dissenters: “And that mob that comes on us to disturb us; it shall be between us and them a war of extermination; for we will follow them till the last drop of their blood is spilled, or else they will have to exterminate us: for we will carry the seat of war to their own houses, and their own families, and one party or the other shall be utterly destroyed.—Remember it then all MEN.” I guess he started the extermination talk, even if it wasn’t clear to all who started the misbehavior. Governor Boggs’ order came in October.
I wonder about the extent of provocation reported in the 1833 Missouri “manifesto” stating, among other things, that the Mormons “declare openly that their God hath given them this county of land, and that sooner or later they must and will have possession of our lands for inheritance…” I hope to get to the podcast.
The Salt Sermon was June 17. The July 4 sermon was where he said “war of extermination.” (I made the same mistake in the interview.) Those are 2 different sermons and easy to mix up.
Thanks, Rick, There are a lot of folks who have applied the term “salt sermon” to the July 4 sermon. I haven’t read it recently in full and have no recollection as to whether there is any legitimate basis for calling it a “salt sermon.” I prefer to take Dr. Baugh’s word for it.
I believe Gov. Boggs was from Jackson County, which would have added to the tense situation and related to his later Extermination Order.
This was a conflict started by anti-Mormons through and through. It was nothing more than a massive overreaction to a non-issue. Bloc-voting? Communalism? Not patronizing outsiders’ businesses? These are not excuses to drive people from their homes. The idea that Mormons were going to outnumber non-Mormons was unfounded. Early Mormon settlers were nothing more than victims of an irrational anti-religious bigotry so common in the US at that time. They weren’t the only ones either. Catholics and Jews were targets of violent bigots as well.
The Salt Sermon on June 17 was where Sidney referred to the scripture in Matt 5:13, “if the salt has lost his savor, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out and to be trodden under foot of men.” Essentially Sidney was calling out dissenters and saying Mormons should trample them.
Then the July 4 sermon is where Rigdon referred to a “war of extermination” between the saints and the Missourians. Once again, this is violent rhetoric that made things worse, and of course Boggs then penned the Extermination Order. Sidney certainly ratcheted up tensions, but Boggs shares blame in not listening to Mormons. Both sides are to blame in hostilities. I can also understand Mormon frustrations in Missouri.
Tagline for 19th-century Mormons: “They don’t play well with others.” In early Missouri, that was complicated by the slavery issue that was the trigger for the Missourians, who were mostly migrated Southerners who didn’t trust the mostly Yankee Mormon immigrants. The article by W. W. Phelps in the LDS newspaper that gave details on the status of free blacks in Missouri (as an aid to any free black Mormons immigrating to MIssouri, as I recall) ignited the Missourians.
But slavery was just the latest problem. Proposing new scripture violated Christian norms. Proposing and then practicing polygamy violated moral norms as well as state law. The fact is that in the 19th century Mormons experienced serious conflict in New York, in Ohio, in Missouri (twice), in Illinois, and then in Utah. As a group, Mormons were just socially indigestible in the 19th century. It took the First Manifesto, Utah statehood, and the Second Manifesto to finally put the Mormons on a path to be more or less full participants in American society and full citizens in the American polity.
John W said:
>>This was a conflict started by anti-Mormons through and through. It was nothing more than a massive overreaction to a non-issue. Bloc-voting? Communalism? Not patronizing outsiders’ businesses? These are not excuses to drive people from their homes. The idea that Mormons were going to outnumber non-Mormons was unfounded. Early Mormon settlers were nothing more than victims of an irrational anti-religious bigotry so common in the US at that time. They weren’t the only ones either. Catholics and Jews were targets of violent bigots as well.<<
This comment keeps getting downvoted, but doesn't John W kinda have a point here?
Missouri was the heart of Klan territory. They didn't truck with papists or Jesus-killers or Mo— (Oh! THAT'S why church leaders are so insistent about the name! Ok, I digress. I know the word "Mormon" has been thoroughly reclaimed by now. But, still, it was originally a slur, right?) And IIRC, wasn't Joseph an abolitionist? That couldn't have sat too well in the 19th century South.
The early Mormons maybe earned themselves some sneers, or the cold shoulder, or talking smack about them down at the pub. But clannishness and being self-righteous weirdos don't merit Haun's Mill. You don't kill people for giving you that pitying smile that says they know they're going to heaven and you're not.
I can understand why the rest of the country was concerned about the devotion of Joseph's followers, and especially Brigham Young's. Today, figures like that, with a following like that, would draw comparisons to Jim Jones. But the Missouri conflict has always sounded to me like it was overwhelmingly picked by the Missourians.
Also from Rigdon’s July 4th sermon:
“We will never be the aggressors, we will infringe on the rights of no people; but shall stand for our own until death. We claim our own rights, and are willing that all others shall enjoy theirs.”
Rigdon threatened “war of extermination” against anti-Mormon mobs attacking the Mormons. After the dust settled in the 1838 war there were 23 Mormon casualties and only 1 non-Mormon casualty, that we know of. Mormons and non-Mormons alike destroyed property and drove people from their homes forcing them to flee. However, Mormons were clearly more the victims than they were perpetrators.
“wasn’t Joseph an abolitionist? ”
Joseph wasn’t a fan of slavery, but he was firmly against the Abolitionist Movement as well. His views were complex. He was more of a fan of gradual emancipation. Abolitionists were seen as crazy radicals, especially in the 1830s, and many people who were against slavery were against the Abolitionist movement as well, because it was seen as too radical. In Joseph’s presidential campaign, he was the first candidate to suggest freeing slaves and compensating slaveholders through the sale of public lands.
Jackson County is aptly named for Andrew Jackson, whose statues outside the two county courthouses in Independence and Kansas City show him in heroic horseback-riding mode. The earliest settlers were largely from Kentucky and Tennessee, perhaps most charitably described as rugged, frontier individualists. Their direct ancestors were largely Scots-Irish immigrants who had settled first in the Carolinas after being driven from their homelands by the British and continually moved west to find more freedom in the open spaces of the Mississippi River basin. They didn’t take kindly to New England Yankees with quite different political, social, and religious ideas.
I’ve lived in Jackson County most of my life, and I can tell you vestiges of that early dynamic remain. The more numerous Southern Baptists (and other assorted “Baptists”) have generally tolerated and come to terms with the substantial number of RLDS members in their headquarters city of Independence, but have been somewhat less accommodating to the growing LDS presence in recent decades. It’s worth noting, though, that the RLDS/CofC has had a far more profound effect on the city of Independence through the years than other, larger religious groups. I think that has something to do with the strong community focus of the former as opposed to a much more individualistic approach (socially and religiously) for the latter.
Yes, I know I’m probably biased in this regard, but even biased people sometimes have a point.