After starting his law practice, Wurzbach married Frances Darden Wagner of Columbus, Texas, in the Episcopal Church there.

Historically many, and perhaps most, of the German immigrants who settled in Central Texas before the American Civil War had opposed slavery and quietly favored the Union.

[2] After the Civil War, during the Reconstruction era and well into the mid-20th century, many German-American Texans supported the Republican Party.

[2] In the late 19th century, the Populist Party attracted many white voters, including in the agrarian South.

He won both elections by a plurality, when many white voters split between supporting the Democratic and Populist parties.

It adopted a poll tax in 1901, which resulted in the intended effect of almost eliminating voting by blacks, as well as many Latinos and poor whites.

Immediately becoming active in local politics after moving to Seguin, Wurzbach was elected as the Guadalupe County prosecuting attorney from 1900 to 1902.

To defuse tensions, Wurzbach helped to organize a show of loyalty by his fellow German Americans, who became active in the Red Cross and the "First Aid Legion", and publicized their purchase of many war bonds.

Reflecting the high rate of immigration and migration to Texas for decades, Wurzbach was the first native Texan to win election as a Republican to Congress.

He won his seat even as the Republican presidential candidates in 1920 and 1924, Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, lost the electoral vote of Texas.

[citation needed] In 1928, the powerful, patronage-based Democratic machine in San Antonio (along with Sam Johnson and Archie Parr)[6] targeted Wurzbach for defeat, and returns appeared to show him losing reelection.

After an investigation into the corrupt voting practices in San Antonio, the House ultimately reversed McCloskey's election (after he had served for eleven months) and seated Wurzbach on February 10, 1930.

The District Court threw out the indictment, based on two grounds: 1) That the term "political purpose" in the law did not include the behavior in question; and 2) If the term did include the behavior, then the Act was unconstitutional, as it was applied to state activities beyond its scope, not a federal election.

[7] With the Great Depression gathering force, Republican incumbents lost many seats in 1930, but the party still had majority control of the House of Representatives.