The essence of the speech was that "several sons of Belial" had crept into the Army, corrupting its former integrity, and that therefore he would propose that every officer should be cashiered that would not "swear that he did believe in his conscience that the putting to death of the late King, Charles Stuart, was lawful and just." Amid the cheers that followed, Lords Howard and Falconbridge (two of the denounced "sons of Belial" ?) left in disgust; but Broghill remained and opposed bravely.

He disliked all tests; but, if there was to be a test, he would propose that it should be simply an oath "to defend the Government as it is now established under the Protector and Parliament." If the present meeting insisted on a test, and did not adopt that one, he would see that it should be moved in Parliament.

This, supported by Whalley and Goffe, calmed the meeting somewhat; and, after much more speaking, in which the necessity of a separation of the military power from the civil was a prominent topic, the result was "_A Humble Representation and Petition of the Officers of the Armies of England, Scotland, and Ireland_," expressed in general and not unrespectful terms, but conveying sufficiently the Army's demands.

Presented to Richard in Whitehall on the 6th of April, this petition was forwarded by him to the Commons on the 8th, with a letter to the Speaker.

For more than a week no notice was taken by the House; but, the petition having been circulated in print, with other petitions and documents more fierce for "the good old cause," and the general council of officers still continuing the meetings at Wallingford House, with the excitement of sermons and prayers added to that of their debates, the House was driven at last into that attitude of direct antagonism to the Army in the name of the Protectorate on which both Royalists and Republicans had calculated.