back to the onions and flesh-pots of Egypt.  He spoke not as their lord, but their fellow-servant, a labourer with them in the same good work; and would therefore detain them no longer, but desire them to repair to their own house, and to choose their speaker.[1]

To procure a parliament favourable to his designs, all the power of the government had been employed to influence the elections; the returns had been examined by a committee of the council, under the pretext of seeing that the provisions of the “instrument” were observed; and the consequence was, that the Lord Grey of Groby, Major Wildman, and some other noted republicans, had been excluded by command of the protector.  Still he found himself unable to mould the house to his wishes.  By the court, Lenthall was put in nomination for the office of speaker; by the opposition, Bradshaw, the boldest and most able of the opposite party.  After a short debate, Lenthall was chosen, by the one, because they knew him to be a timid and a time-serving character; by the other, because they thought that, to place him in the chair, was one step towards the revival of the long parliament, of which he had been speaker.  But no one ventured to propose that he should be offered, according to ancient custom, to the acceptance of the supreme magistrate.  This was thought to savour too much of royalty.[2]

[Footnote 1:  Compare the official copy printed by G. Sawbridge, 1654, with the abstract by Whitelock (599, 600), and by Bordeaux (Thurloe, ii. 518).  See also Journals, Sept. 3, 4.]

[Footnote 2:  It appears from the Council Book (1654, Aug. 21), that, on that day, letters were despatched to the sheriffs, containing the names of the members who had been approved by the council, with orders to give them notice to attend.  The letters to the more distant places were sent first, that they might all be received about the same time.]

It was not long before the relative strength of the parties was ascertained.  After a sharp debate,[a] in which it was repeatedly asked why the members of the long parliament then present should not resume the authority of which they had been illegally deprived by force, and by what right, but that of the sword, one man presumed to “command his commanders,” the question was put, that the house resolve itself into a committee, to determine whether or not the government shall be in a single person and a parliament; and, to the surprise and alarm of Cromwell, it was carried[b] against the court by a majority of five voices.[1] The leaders of the opposition were Bradshaw, Hazlerig, and Scot, who now contended in the committee that the existing government emanated from an incompetent authority, and stood in opposition to the solemn determination of a legitimate parliament; while the protectorists, with equal warmth, maintained that, since it had been approved by the people, the only real source of power, it could not be subject to revision by the representatives