UNFORTUNATELY, the paucity of debate among the Framers over the nature of an impeachable offense leaves us with little guidance as to what might be considered grounds for impeachment. Looking elsewhere, we find two possible sources of guidance: England, and the colonial experience.
In February 1974, the House of Representatives' Committee on the Judiciary published a report by the Staff of Impeachment Inquiry titled "Constitutional Grounds for Presidential Impeachment." To better understand the Framers' intent, the Inquiry examined the history of impeachment in England, noting Alexander Hamilton's statement that "Great Britain had served as the model from which [impeachment] has been borrowed," and George Mason's reference, when he proposed the "other high Crimes and Misdemeanors" clause, to the impeachment of Warren Hastings in India.
(Hastings, the British administrator of Bengal, faced charges of "gross maladministration, corruption in office, and cruelty toward the people of India." The impeachment proceedings began in 1788 but did not end until 1795. Hastings was acquitted.)
At the time of the American Constitutional Convention, England had impeached persons under "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" for more than 400 years. In analyzing English impeachments, the 1974 Inquiry concluded that the phrase referred to acts that damaged the state:
* In 1386, in the first appearance of the phrase, Parliament impeached Michael de la Pole for "breaking a promise he made to the full Parliament to execute in connection with a parliamentary ordinance the advice of a committee of nine lords regarding the improvement of the estate of the King and the realm," and for failing to pay a ransom with funds that Parliament allocated for such use.
* In 1450, William de la Pole was impeached for "high Crimes and Misdemeanors" for "advising the King to grant liberties and privileges to certain persons to the hindrance of the due execution of laws, procuring offices for persons who were unfit and unworthy of them, and squandering away the public treasure."
* In 1621, the king's Attorney General, Sir Henry Yelverton, was impeached for failing to prosecute suits he had commenced and for prematurely exercising authority.
* In 1640, Thomas Wentworth faced impeachment for "traitorously endeavor[ing] to subvert the Fundamental Laws of Government of the Realms ... and instead thereof, to introduce Arbitrary and Tyranical Government against Law."
