und up by a noble dinner in Whitehall, to which the whole House had
been invited by the Protector, followed by a concert, vocal and
instrumental, in the part of the Palace called the Cockpit.[1]

[Footnote 1: Commons Journals of dates given, and of Feb. 18;
Carlyle, III. 204-211; Godwin, IV. 331-333; _Merc. Pol._ No.
349 (Feb. 12-19, 1656-7); Whitlocke, IV. 286; Parl. Hist. III. 1490.]

Three days after the great dinner in Whitehall, i.e. on Monday, Feb.
23, 1656-7, there was an incident in the House which turned all the
future proceedings of this Second Parliament of the Protectorate into
a new channel. It is thus entered in the Journals:--

" ... Sir Christopher Pack [Ex-Mayor of London, knighted by
Cromwell, Sept. 25, 1655, and now one of the members for the City]
presented a Paper to the House, declaring it was somewhat come to
his hand tending to the Settlement of the Nation and of Liberty and
Property, and prayed it might be received and read; and, it being
much controverted whether the same should be read without farther
opening [preliminary explanation] thereof, the Question being
propounded _That this Paper, offered by Sir Christopher Pack, be
further opened by him before it is read,_ and the Question being
put _That this Question be now put,_ it passed in the Negative. The
Question being propounded _That this Paper, offered by Sir
Christopher Pack, be now read,_ and the Question being put _That
that Question be now put,_ the House was divided. The Noes went
forth:--Colonel Sydenham, Mr. Robinson, Tellers for the Noes--with
the Noes 54; Sir Charles Wolseley, Colonel Fitzjames, Tellers for
the Yeas--with the Yeas 144. So it passed in the Affirmative. And,
the main Question being put, it was Resolved _That this Paper,
offered by Sir Christopher Pack, be now read._ The said Paper was
read accordingly, and was entitled 'The Humble Address and
Remonstrance of the Knights, Citizens, and Burgesses, now assembled
in the Parliament of this Commonwealth.'"[1]

[Footnote 1: Commons Journals of date.]

The debate on the Paper was protracted to the evening "a candle"
having been ordered in for the purpose; and it was then adjourned to
the next day. In fact, for the next four months, or through the whole
remainder of the session, the House was to continue the debate, or
questions arising out of it, and to do little else. For, on the 24th
of February, it was resolved by a majorit