Washington sentinel., 1853-10-12
BARNBuRNER REPENTANCE.

BARNBuRNER REPENTANCE.
It has been very confidently asserted that
the baruburner faction Of New York has aban-
doned its former errors, and sincerely repented
Of its past sins. And with this as q conceded
point, all sorts of appeals have been made to
the democratic party as to the impolicy of ex
Guiding from its pale or its honors such as were
only for the time led astrav. II has been fire.
quently stated that there was only temporary
eccentricity, owing TO the sudden introduction
of grand disturbing cause. But we believe
that the return of the freesoiler TO the old orbit
was owing to the fact that their new course
was soon found to be uncomfortable and dreary
in consequence of its distance from the source
of official heat and that they desired TO bask
in the direct rays of central authority.
We deny, here on the very Threshold of the
matter, that this frcesoil faction has ever given
any satisfactory evidence that it has sincerely
repented of its former sins. Is it not enough
to start the doubt of the democratic party OF
the country, as to the honesty of these men,
that they have utterly forfeited the confidence
of those who know them best9 Is it not enough
to strengthen that doubt when men, who labor
under this suspicion at home, refuse to vote for
resolutions such as those proposed by Mr.. Taylor
in the New York egisature-resolution fair,
plain, and according to the party line, but only
SO worded as to prevent covert reservations?
When a sincere repentance is claimed for
them, has not the democratic party the right
TO ask confession of sins? Has it not the
right to demand an acknowledgment of errors,
and an expression Of sorrow? Has that con-
fession been made? Can any one show US
where these men, at any time since the COM
mission of their outrage upon the democratic
party in l848, whether in council assembled or
singly have even acknowledged that they erred
in their support Of Van Buren; or that they
regretted it; or that, under similar circum-
stances, they would not repeat the offence :?
Has any one of their resoiutions-has any
speech from any one Of their lcaders-has any
one of their newspaper organs said even this
much? The democracy of the country, and
especially the faithful portion Of the party in
New York. has not only the right 10 demand
this Of them, but it would be negligent Of its
own interests, if it were not to do so. The de-
rnocracy has the right to ask it of them, both
as "indemnity for the past, and security for the
future
There is no desire to humiliate the ireesoilerS
by requiring Of them any debasing confessions
Far from it. But yet the mere fact that they
themselves, Of their own motion, have not made
such acknowledgment, ct itself, gives the right
to the faithful portion Of the democracy of New
York to distrust them. Men who could desert
the democratic party on such issues and with
such men as were presented in 1913 are not
bound TO the party by hooks of steel, and
their steadincss in trial and danger might well
be questioned, even when they have been pro-
fuse in the most humiliating evidences of re-
pentance. The democratic party would not be
unjust to them, if it required them to confess
their sins in the most public methods, and then
compelled them TO probation of years, before
they were admitted to its honors.
The leaders Of this faction have, in times
only just passed, published the rankest here
sles-haNe lnallSneu the purest palrlota ol the
land-haye denounced the wisest and mos,
healthy laws--have not only spoken for them
selves for the time being; but looking to the
future, have mapped out for themselves the
same course for similar exigcncies hereafter
pledgng their honor and whatever of integrity
they may have TO pursue it. And, while al
this is undoubted we have looked in vain for
any recantation--ior any confession Of error
save what is contained in general resolutions
which the men who know them best, and
upon whose bare words the democratic party
has ever relied, strenuously assert are passed
with fraudulent intent, and as cover for fur
ther imposture. If these men are honest in the
passage of their national resolutions" why
did they refuse to vote for those offered by Mr.
Taylor? He was persuaded, after repeated
trial, that this faction was not to be relied upon
--he felt that it did not stand TO the democratic
party "as flesh Of its flesh, and bone Of its
bone" Believing that it was held in sort Of
imperfect solution, he introduced his test, and
upon its application, the freesoil faction, true