Three presidents have been impeached in American history and none have been convicted: Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump. New York has by contrast only had one governor impeached, but he was also convicted and thus removed from office. This was William Sulzer (1863-1941), who lasted only nine months as governor. His start in politics was campaigning for Tammany Hall machine candidates in 1884. Gradually making his way up in the organization through his loyalty to boss Richard Croker, he was elected to the State Assembly in 1889. In 1893, Croker got him chosen as speaker of the Assembly, only thirty years old. He was loyal to boss Richard Croker, and this loyalty paid off with his election to the New York State Assembly, where he was selected to be speaker in 1893. This would propel him to Congress, being elected in 1894. Sulzer was a reform-minded representative who opposed imperialism, supported the cause of the Boers in the Boer War, and supported the eight-hour workday. For his man of the people approach he became known as “Plain Bill”. Although thought of as progressive, Sulzer’s record seems by DW-Nominate to be to the right of many of his Democratic colleagues at the time at a -0.222. Sulzer remained for some time in the House, and although in his final session of Congress he was chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, his true ambition was to be governor. This was stalled as Croker’s successor, Charles F. “Silent Charlie” Murphy, repeatedly passed him over for the gubernatorial nomination for people he thought of as more reliable. Finally, Sulzer got the nod in 1912 and received the support of Woodrow Wilson and many other progressive-minded figures, winning a resounding victory.

Although Tammany expected loyalty from Sulzer, he had higher ambitions in mind than politics in New York. He wanted to be the president. As New York Assembly chaplain James T. Kirk, who investigated the Sulzer case said, “A clairvoyant told him at an early age that he was going to be speaker of the Assembly, he would then be governor, and then he was going to be president…That became a central driving force in his life” (Mahoney). Well, two for three isn’t shabby from a clairvoyant! Although support of Tammany Hall could translate well on the state level, it didn’t do so on the national level. Once he had the reins of power, he came out swinging, seeking to take control of the state’s Democratic Party. Sulzer sought to be a reformist governor, battled against Tammany Hall on patronage appointments, pushed for open primaries, and conducted an investigation into government corruption. He declared, “Rest assured that in this struggle, those who help me will win my gratitude; that those who oppose me will merit condemnation” (Spector).

All this didn’t sit well with “Silent Charlie” Murphy, who was now out to wreck Sulzer. Unfortunately for Sulzer, Tammany Hall had far more allies in the state legislature than he did, including Assembly Speaker Al Smith and Senate Majority Leader Robert F. Wagner. While Sulzer battled Tammany’s patronage appointments, they retaliated by refusing to confirm Sulzer’s appointments. They and others in retaliation for investigating state government investigated Sulzer and discovered that during the campaign, he had used campaign funds for personal use such as investments, had failed to report the full extent of his campaign financing and spending as required by New York’s Corrupt Practices Act, and had dramatically underreported major donors (Spector). This was a shabby look for “Plain Bill”. The state legislature used the special session that Sulzer had called for a vote on open primaries to instead impeach him. Although Governor Sulzer challenged the constitutionality of the proceedings given that they covered activities before he was governor, the Assembly nonetheless impeached him. The Senate followed through on October 17, 1913, after Sulzer failed to testify in his own defense, with him being convicted of three of eight articles of impeachment and removed from office. Lieutenant Governor Martin H. Glynn succeeded him. The New York Supreme Court, probably in recognition of the overtly political nature of the matter, declined to bar him from holding political office, which was an option in cases of impeachment and conviction.

Aftermath

Sulzer had a temporary comeback in his election to the Assembly only weeks after his impeachment as a Progressive and attempted to regain the governorship on the Progressive Party ticket. However, he didn’t gain traction due to the opposition of Theodore Roosevelt. He created the American Party to serve as his vehicle and won the nomination of the Prohibition Party as well due to him making a speech in which he condemned rum, but he didn’t attract much support. However, the Republican candidate won in 1914, a sort of victory for Sulzer as his Democratic successor had been unseated. In 1916, Sulzer gained the American Party’s nomination for president, but only got 181 votes. His political career was over.

Sulzer’s impeachment was of doubtful validity, given that the charges were about conduct before he was governor. Additionally, his misdeeds were not uncommon in that time and if that is all he was guilty of, he was far from the worst of New York’s politicians. In 1983, the nonagenarian Hamilton Fish III, who was a Progressive Party assemblyman from 1914 to 1916 and later a Republican in Congress, recalled in a letter to future Congressman Maurice Hinchey that “His impeachment as governor was a farce and a fraud” (Mahoney). Sulzer’s true offense was using and then turning on Tammany Hall, and the consensus of researchers is that the impeachment of Sulzer had no better grounding than politics. However, it should also be noted that Theodore Roosevelt’s assessment of Sulzer was poor, and when he tried to get the Progressive Party nomination for governor, he torpedoed it by writing a letter to party members that “the trouble with Sulzer is that he does not tell the truth” (Fredman, 266).

Interestingly, the two legislative leaders that figured most prominently in this overtly politicized impeachment would be major players in national politics down the road. Robert F. Wagner would serve as New York’s senator from 1927 to 1949 and would be one of the foremost promoters of New Deal legislation, including sponsoring the Social Security Act and the Wagner Act, the latter known as the magna carta of legislation protecting organized labor. Al Smith, who closely connected himself with Tammany Hall and played such a large role in carrying out “Silent Charlie” Murphy’s bidding, found that Tammany Hall helped his statewide prospects greatly but hindered his presidential prospects. Smith was a highly successful governor from 1919 to 1920 and again from 1923 to 1928. Thrice he ran for the Democratic nomination, in 1924, 1928, and 1932. Although he won in 1928, Smith’s Tammany Hall association served as an anchor to his campaign, and along with his Catholicism and anti-Prohibition stances cost him victories in normally Democratic states in the South. Sulzer’s view that he had to take a reformist path to have a chance at the presidency was sound; the last two Democrats from New York who have won the presidency, Grover Cleveland and FDR, were both governors who opposed Tammany Hall. However, the latter was more astute in his relations with Tammany Hall and was thus able to be more of a force in countering them as governor and later president. Although Sulzer had the right idea broadly, he lacked the political skill to take control of the Democratic Party in New York, much less run for president. He failed to do the legislative math and his approach to reform is reminiscent to me of a bull in a China shop. For Sulzer to have had a chance to succeed in his presidential ambitions, his governorship had to survive Tammany Hall’s retaliation, and it did not.

References

Lifflander, M.L. (2010, Spring). The Impeachment. New York Archives, 9 (4). 18-23.

Retrieved from

https://www.nysarchivestrust.org/application/files/6015/6467/5436/archivesmag_spring2010.pdf

Mahoney, B. (2021, April 15). Only one governor has been impeached. Some say he should be unimpeached. Politico.

Retrieved from

https://www.politico.com/states/new-york/albany/story/2021/04/15/only-one-governor-has-been-impeached-some-say-he-should-be-unimpeached-1374546

O’Donnell, J. (2021, March 4). The story of NY’s only gubernatorial impeachment. City & State New York.

Retrieved from

https://www.cityandstateny.com/opinion/2021/03/the-story-of-nys-only-gubernatorial-impeachment/175118/

Spector, J. (2013, August 19). 100 years ago, a N.Y. governor was impeached. Albany Democrat & Chronicle.

Retrieved from

https://www.democratandchronicle.com/story/news/local/2013/08/18/100-years-ago-a-ny-governor-was-impeached/2669421/

Sulzer, William. Voteview.

Retrieved from

https://voteview.com/person/9080/william-sulzer