The Sun.
London, England, 1853-02-11 00:00:00

The third measure which Lord John Russell last
n ight announce d as part of the Ministerial programme
for the session is one of great importance. . bill is
to be brought in for the purpose of promoting the
education of the people. In other words, we are to
have a scheme of national education. This is a ques-
tion in which the public has long felt a profound
interest. It is a question of great difficulty. If
the Aberdeen Administration bring forward a mea-
sure of national education which will command the
confidence of the country, they will,. indeed, be in
a position to boast of having achieved something
meritorious. But we have great doubts on the sub-
ject. We shall, however, not condemn the intended
measure before we have seen it. When it is fairly
before the country, Nye shall not be slow to express
our opinion of its character.
The question of transportation to Australia is one
which has occupied the attention of the Coalition
Cabinet during the recess, and the conclusion at
which Ministers have arrived, is that no more con-
victs shall be sent either to that part of our colo-
nial possessions, or to Van Diemen's Land. This
was the course which Lord Grey meant to propose
to the last Parliament, but the sudden extinction
of the Cabinet of which he was a member, pre-
vented the noble lord from carrying his views into
effect. In conjunction with the resolution of Mi-
nisters to put au end to the transportation of con,
victs to Australia, we are promised the careful con-
sideration of the Whole question of secondary punish-
ments.

The question of law reform has also occupied
the attention of the new Government, and we are
promised further advances in that direction, in the
course of the session. A bill for further law re-
forms is to be brought in, in a few days by the
Lord Chancellor.

The financial statement of the Chancellor of the
Exchequer is not to be brought forward till after
the Easter recess. What we are to have then, in
the way of novelty, if anything at all, has not been
permitted to transpire.
Ireland is not to be forgotten in the legislation
of the session.. Lord John Russell informed the
house that it is the intention of the Government
to move for the appointment of a select committee
to consider the landlord and tenant question, in
that country.
Last of all, the noble 10111 came to the question
of questions,—the question of Parliamentary re-
form. And here, we regret to say, the new Govern-
ment have broken faith with the country. As the
Times stated a few days ago, and as we informed our
readeri more than two months since, we are to have no
RefOrm Bill this year. When we first ammounaed
that Ministers had come to a resolution not to have
any Reform Bill this session, the public could hardly
give credence to the statement. Nor was it willing
to believe the fact that it could be so, when
the Times reiterated last week, what we had
affirmed eight weeks before. Nor can we wonder
that the country was loth to believe that the new
Ministry, every one of whose members had given a
solemn assurance, either in Parliament or on the
hustings, that we were to have a liberal measure
of reform,--could be guilty of so flagrant a breach
of faith with the public as the-postponement of the
Reform Bill involves. Such conduct is deeply to be
deplored on the ground of public morals. It not
only impairs, but it destroys all confidence in pub-
lic men. It is melancholy to behold so many per-
sons as those . which constitute the Aberdeen
Government all concur in practising a deception
on the country. The people, it now turns out,
were too confiding. They carried their gene-
rosity to excess. Ministers asked for a fair trial.
They implored the country not to prejudge them.
They begged to be allowed to develope, the policy
they intended to pursue before they were condemned.
We acquiesced in the reasonableness of the request,
and intimated our readiness to grant them the fair
trial which they demanded. The country did the
same. 'They have had their trial. They have been
allowed to announce their policy. They have been
tried, and found wanting. The event has shown
that the country's confidence was misplaced.
We say all this with sorrow. It would have
seenieasrettshch
Aberdeeni
_giidmvenilusiistgira-teiaotnpleiTiunrge to
forwardhave
measures
would have justified us in giving them our support.
They have, however, determined on not taking one
step in the path of popular progress. The country
will the Derby Government
endowbyastkh,e andojeotaioskn with
gained reason, what we have
from office ? What single measure is there to be
found in the Aberdeen-Russell programme of last
night which Lord Derby and Mr. Disraeli would
not have given us ? We have had a change of men,
but we are to have no change of measures. This
is really, as a former Premier once remarked, " too
bad." It is not only a gross breach of faith with
the country, but it constitutes an outrage on the
national understanding. It is a most unwarrant-
able trifling with the people of England. It as-
sumes that they may be deceived, and yet not be
aware of it.

We fear that the consequences of the Ministerial
developments of last night will be of a very serious
kind. There will be a reaction in the public mind.
The existing tranquillity will be succeeded by scenes
of excitement and agitation which we would much
rather not be fated to witness. The mingled
amazement and coldness with which Lord John
Russell's speech was received by the house, ought
to have been regarded by his lordship as an ear-
nest of the feeling with which that speech will be
received in the country. The disappointment will
be deep and universal. So will be the indignation
which the speech will evoke.
And, as if it had not been enough to tell the
House of Commons, and through it the country,
that we are to have _no Reform Bill this year, Lord
John Russell was at great pains to disclaim the
idea of ever having promised to give a more liberal
measure of representative reform than his bill of
last session. He was even indignant that won:ls. tom
that effect should have been ascribed to hinct He
never said nor meant anything of the
kin.as that
of doeslB not evenirhe measurepprro6mibasbeiliutsysois,gtohoadtaffay nsu
it will be
mea-
suremuch worseeverbe h
tgoatnthe on from the of lastepresensetssmioen.n,

Ix LrvEßPoor.--
' THE RECENT ROBBERY 0
7 3,000!.
ons, before Gilbert Hen-
At the Liverpool
the office of Messrs. Brown,
3g,Frederickeosoml. f r Clarkeom
Robert wa s chargedspence
r
dweirtshosnt,saElisnqg.,
Humphreys,
a clerk
Liverpool, on 13th November last.
Shipley, and Co.,
Mr. parrye,feonfceth. e HnoemeprCoisreccuuittiohnelwd
aasspceocuidalucretetadinuery
for theAs the Recorder,
s quarter
ukm nf
pdivall. The details of this robbery have been
:fir.i, at length in our columns at the date of its occur-
rence. After hearing the evidence brought forward, ad
rence.
also an able speech froni Mr. Parry, in reply, the jury
returned a verdict of Not Guilty, and the prisoner was
discharged. Mr. Parry applied for some pawn-tickets
that were taken from Clarke at the time of the arrest,
but Mr. Clough (the in-door superintendent of the police
department in Liverpool), declined for the present to
restore them, but stated that should nothing further
transpire, he should forward them by post in the course
of a week.