Here's what happened last time the Alabama legislature sought impeachment, 100 years ago

Campaign collateral for John Purifoy's 1914 campaign for Alabama Secretary of State. (Photo: Contributed) — Campaign collateral for John Purifoy’s 1914 campaign for Alabama Secretary of State. (Photo: Contributed)

MONTGOMERY, Ala. — After John Purifoy served in the Jeff Davis Artillery of the Confederate Army, he went on to become one of the most successful politicians of the early post-Civil War era. He was elected to the Alabama House of Representatives (1890) before going on to hold three of Alabama six Constitutional offices: State Auditor (1892), Treasurer (1911), and finally Secretary of State (1915).

Most of what Mr. Purifoy did in those offices is lost to history, but he does hold one distinction that is particularly relevant in light of current events: He is the only constitutional officer the Alabama legislature ever tried to impeach.

Mr. Purifoy’s name is suddenly a hot topic in Montgomery as members of the Alabama legislature decide how to conduct impeachment proceedings against Alabama Governor Robert Bentley. State Rep. Ed Henry (R-Hartselle) has said he plans to begin the process when the legislature reconvenes on Tuesday.

“The difficult part is that we’ve never impeached a governor before,” Henry told Yellowhammer. “The Constitution is fairly vague about the process.”

Here’s what we know for certain:

Articles of impeachment, which function as the charges against the accused, must be passed by a simple majority in the Alabama House of Representatives. If the House votes to impeach, the individual then stands trial before the Alabama Senate in a trial presided over by the Chief Justice of the State Supreme Court.

A cloud of uncertainty has engulfed the rest of the process.

One ongoing internal debate, for instance, is whether the articles of impeachment should have to work their way through the typical committee process used for other bills. Some lawmakers Yellowhammer spoke with believe that an impeachment vote should go directly before the full body, but some say it should begin in the Rules Committee, which would add a hurdle to the process.

Here’s what happened in 1915, when the House sought to impeach then-Secretary of State Purifoy:

The main reason the legislature moved to impeach Mr. Purifoy was that, during his campaign, he had paid $1,000 to J. H. Nunnelee, another candidate for secretary of state, to get him to exit the race (sound familiar?), and did not list it on his sworn campaign finance form.

As a result, the articles of impeachment against Mr. Purifoy, which were presented to the full House after a majority vote of the Rules Committee, insisted that he “was and is guilty of an offense involving moral turpitude, in connection with his office, and has brought great scandal and reproach to the office of Secretary of State of the State of Alabama.”

A minority report opposing impeachment was also submitted by the Rules Committee on the grounds that Mr. Purifoy’s indiscretions had taken place before he had taken office.

“The words (in the Constitution) ‘while in office’ are words of limitation, and it requires but a moment’s thought to convince any one, that impeachment proceedings cannot be brought, or entertained, against any person who is no longer in office,” the minority report reads. “It is equally clear that impeachment proceedings should not be begun, nor maintained for any offense, committed before the officer was in office.”

The minority report ultimately prevailed in the full House and Mr. Purifoy was not impeached. He went on to unsuccessfully run for governor in 1918.

While Governor Bentley’s alleged indiscretions certainly took place while he was in office, the process the House used — a committee investigation and report presented to the full House — in considering whether to impeach Mr. Purifoy could still provide some direction.

But if impeachment passes the House and the process moves to the Senate, the state will be sailing in entirely uncharted waters.