Sir Christopher Pack’s paper of Feb. 23, 1656-7, entitled The Humble Address and Remonstrance, &c., was nothing less than a proposed address by Parliament to the Protector, asking him to concur with the Parliament in a total recast of the existing Constitution.  It had been privately considered and prepared by several persons, and Whitlocke had been requested to introduce it, “Not liking—­several things in it,” he had declined to do so; but, Sir Christopher having volunteered, Whitlocke, Broghill, Glynne and others, were to back him.  Indeed, all the Oliverians were to back him.  Or, rather, there was to grow out of the business, according as the Oliverians were more hearty or less hearty in their cooperation, a new distinction of that body into Thorough Oliverians and Distressed Oliverians or Contrariants.  Why this should have been the case will appear if we quote the First Article of the proposed Address after the Preamble.  It ran thus:  “That your Highness will be pleased to assume the name, style, title, dignity, and office of KING of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the respective Dominions and Territories thereunto belonging, and exercise thereof, to hold and enjoy the same, with the rights and privileges and prerogatives justly, legally, and rightfully, belonging thereunto:  That your Highness will be pleased, during your life-time, to appoint and declare the person who shall, immediately after your death, succeed you in the Government of these Nations.”  The rest of the Address was to correspond.  Thus Article II. proposed a return to the system of two Houses of Parliament, and generally the tenor was towards royal institutions.  On the other hand, the regality proposed was to be strictly constitutional.  There was to be an end to all arbitrary power.  There were to be free and full Parliaments once in three years at farthest; there was to be no violent interference in future with the process of Parliament, no exclusion of any persons that had been duly returned by the constituencies; and his Highness and Council were not to make ordinances by their own authority, but all laws, and changes or abrogations of laws, were to be by Act of Parliament.  Oliver was to be King, if he chose, and a King with very large powers; but he was to keep within Statute.[1]

[Footnote 1:  Whitlocke, IV. 286 and 289; Commons Journals of March 2, 3, and 24, 1656-7, and March 25, 1657 (whence I have recovered the original wording of Article I. of the Address).]

On March 2 and 3 the First Article of the Address was debated, with the result that it was agreed to postpone any vote on the first and most important part of the Article, offering Oliver the Kingship, but with the passing of the second part, offering him, whether it should be as King or not, the power of nominating his successor.  A motion for postponing the vote on this part also was lost by 120 to 63.  Then, on the 5th, Article II., proposing Parliaments of