William Henry Purnell (1826-1902)
MSA SC 3520-1559
Biography:
Born in Worcester County, February 3, 1826. Son of Moses Purnell and Maria Bowen Purnell. Attended public schools and Buckingham Academy. Graduated from Delaware College (now the University of Delaware) in 1846. Studied law under John R. Franklin. Admitted to the Maryland Bar, 1848. Married Margaret Neill Martin (d. September 3, 1895) c. 1848; ten children, five of whom died in childhood. Died March 30, 1902. Both William and Margaret were buried in Annapolis.
Attorney. Prosecuting attorney for Worcester County, 1850. State's attorney, 1850. Deputy attorney general, 1853-55. Comptroller of the treasury, 1856-61 (resigned on May 8, 1861). Affiliated with the Whig, Know-Nothing, Unionist, and Democrat parties, respectively. Received 34 votes for nomination for governor at the Know-Nothing convention of 1857. Named deputy postmaster of Baltimore by President Abraham Lincoln in 1861; reappointed by President Andrew Johnson in 1866 but rejected for the appointment by the U.S. senate. Appointed assessor of internal revenue for Baltimore by President Johnson and held the position for a year before failing to win approval for the appointment by congress. Colonel, U.S. Army, 1861-62. Organized and commanded the Purnell Legion of 700 to 1,200 infantry, cavalry, and artillery troops, serving on Maryland's eastern shore, 1861-62. Engaged in the private practice of law, 1867-70. President of Delaware College and professor of English literature, political science, and Latin, 1870-85; speech instructor, 1897-1902. Life member of the board of trustees, Delaware College. Named law ex-officio president, Delaware board of education, 1876. Principal, Frederick Female Seminary (now Hood College), Frederick, Maryland, and later New Windsor College, Carroll County, Maryland.
Purnell was peripherally involved in an interesting episode in Maryland history involving the office of comptroller. He was elected to the office in 1857 and served in that capacity until the next election of 1859, when he ran for comptroller as the incumbent against A. Lingan Jarrett. Purnell won the race, but only with obviously inflated numbers from the city of Baltimore that were achieved by questionable means. As a result, the Maryland House of Delegates passed Resolution No. 6 on March 10, 1860, declaring the elections void in Baltimore due to widespread rioting and fraud, and declaring that Jarrett was elected comptroller. Governor Thomas Holliday Hicks refused to recognize Jarrett or administer the oath of office to him, and Purnell continued in office until he resigned on May 8, 1861. In the wake of Purnell's resignation, Governor Hicks appointed Dennis Claude comptroller. Claude took possession of the comptroller's account books, stamp, and office space in the record office building in Annapolis, while Jarrett started his own books, procured another copy of the comptroller's stamp, and set up office in the old comptroller's office in the State House. During the spring, summer and early fall of 1861, Claude and Jarrett held competing claims to the office of comptroller. Jarrett had the support of the treasurer, Sprigg Harwood, while Claude was supported by Governor Hicks. Because the governor had refused to administer the oath of office to Jarrett, the legislature acted again on June 21, 1861 by passing an act (chapter 43) enabling Jarrett to take the oath by a Court of Appeals judge. Jarrett took the oath of office in July, 1861 before Judge James L. Bartol. Claude then took the case to the Harford County Circuit Court asking for an injunction against Jarrett to prevent him from acting as comptroller. The court held that the constitution called for disputed elections to be decided by the legislature, that the governor had the power to make appointments only until the legislature acted, and that it had done so in this case by deciding the election for Jarrett. Claude appealed to the Court of Appeals, which unanimously upheld the lower court's decision on October 8, 1861. Unfortunately, Jarrett was unable to enjoy the role of undisputed comptroller for long, as the elections held shortly thereafter brought Samuel Snowden Maffit to the office on January 8, 1862.
As comptroller in 1858, Purnell was sued by a Matilda E. Green, a woman who owned an engine house that the state was renting for its fire engine. In the lawsuit she asked the court for a mandamus requiring Purnell to issue a warrant on the Treasurer for rent she believed was due her by the state. The case, Matilda E. Green vs. Wm. H. Purnell, Comptroller of the Treasury, was an important one for the history of the comptroller's office because it defined the legal parameters of the office in more precise terms than those in the constitution. Ms. Green was represented by Thomas S. Alexander. Alexander argued that Resolution No. 9, passed by the General Assembly in 1849, appropriated $50 a year to Ms. Green for rent on her engine house, payable each year on the first day of December. Successive appropriations were made every year and in 1856 the appropriation was increased to $100. Although a lease was not signed, Alexander argued that the resolution of 1849 was tantamount to a lease, and that the state was therefore required by law to give legal notice to end the lease. The state paid her for rent up to December 1, 1856, and continued to store its engine in Ms. Green's engine house for the rest of the month of December 1856. On January 1, 1857, the state librarian, whose job it was to store the fire engine, moved it to a different house without giving formal notice to Ms. Green. That being the case, Alexander argued that Ms. Green was entitled to a full year's rent for 1857 of $100, even though that amount, appropriated by the legislature, had already been paid to the owner of the second engine house. He asserted that a clear appropriation had been made by the legislature to Ms. Green, and that the comptroller should have exercised judgment in his decision of whom to pay for rent before paying the second landlord, and that he should have judged that claim invalid. Alexander argued that the comptroller was therefore bound to issue a warrant to the treasurer for payment to Ms. Green, and that the court should order him to do so by mandamus. The majority of the Appeals Court judges disagreed. Judges John Bowers Eccleston and James L. Bartol based their decision on their interpretation of the constitutional role of comptroller. They believed that when the constitution entrusted the comptroller with the task of "adjusting and settling accounts" and the treasurer with the duty to pay those amounts on warrant of the comptroller, that it also inherently designated the comptroller to be the one making value judgments about the validity of the accounts. A headnote stated that, "The Comptroller of the Treasury, being clothed by the constitution with the exclusive power of adjusting and settling public accounts, is not a mere ministerial officer, and cannot, therefore, be compelled, by mandamus, to perform any act, in the discharge of his duties, which involves the exercise of judgment and discretion." In the minds of the majority of judges, the comptroller had exercised the judgment assigned to him by the constitution to deny Ms. Green her claim. They affirmed the lower court's ruling and dismissed the case. Chief Judge John C. LeGrand dissented. He believed that the comptroller was obligated to pay any party entitled to a legislative appropriation and that if he withheld payment he could be held liable for "non-performance of duty." LeGrand wrote that, "To allow to the Comptroller, on his mere caprice, to withhold the payment of all appropriations, would be to make him the supreme authority in the State; in truth, it would be to confer upon him the power to stop the wheels of government, and bankrupt its credit. He has no such power." LeGrand believed that there was nothing in the comptroller's job that required him to make a value judgment. LeGrand argued that the majority of the court had acknowledged that Ms. Green's claim was valid, and that they were wrong to deny her payment.
Return to William Henry Purnell's Introductory Page
|
Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!
|