In the Lawrence-Butler brief on the Johnson trial, an im-
peachable offense is thus defined:

" We define, therefore, an impeachable high crime or mis-
demeanor to be one in its nature of consequences subversive
of some fundamental or essential principle of government or
highly prejudicial to the public interest, and this may con-
sist of a violation of the Constitution, of law, of an official
oath, or of duty, by an act committed or omitted, or, with
violating a positive law, by the abuse of discretionary powers
from improper motives, or for any improper purpose."

Another most valuable contribution to the question was made
by the House Judiciary Committee in 1912 in the Archbald case.
In this report Judge Clayton argues from the lectures of Richard
Wooddesson in Law Lectures delivered in Oxford in 1777 (vol.
2, pages 355—58) that the influences of magistrates and officers
intrusted with the administration of public offices, and the abuses
of their delegated powers "may not unsuitably engage the authority
of the highest court and the wisdom of the sagest assembly. The
Commons, therefore, as the grand inquest of the nation, became



24

suitors for penal jiistice and they cannot consistently, either with
their own dignity or with safety to the accused, sue elsewhere but
to those who share with them in the Legislature. On this policy
is founded the origin of impeachments."

On the functions of impeachment, quotation is made by Clayton
from Eawle on the Constitution (p. 211) :

" The delegation of important trusts affecting the higher
interests of society, is always from various causes liable to
abuse. The fondness frequently felt for the inordinate exten-
sion of power, the influence of party and of prejudice . ..
