"Now, there is no difference, under the Constitution and laws,
between stealing negroes from Kentucky and stealing horses from
Kentucky. The Constitution of the United States and the laws of
Kentucky hold one not less criminal than the other; and a paper in
this city would be just precisely as justifiable in publishing the
proceedings of a horse stealing society as the proceedings of a
negro stealing society. There is not less guilt involved in the one
than the other.

"For our own part we are disposed to call things by their right
names. We believe that he who would be guilty of aiding and
abetting the escape of a negro from his master, would not hesitate
to steal any other property if he could do it with equal safety to
himself. The fact that slaveholding is a sin does not change the
nature of the offense, because the Bible doctrine of submission to
the powers that be, is a plain and unequivocal duty. Negro stealing
is as much a violation of the law of God as of the law of a
Southern State.

"But we have not much faith in the Christianity of those abolitionists
who steal negroes. And the receiver of stolen goods is equally
guilty with the thief. Tom Corwin was not far out of the way (and
it must be conceded that Mr. Corwin has had abundant opportunities
to know) when he declared that 'they (the abolitionists) are a
whining, canting, praying set of fellows who keep regular books of
debit and credit with the Almighty.' 'They will,' he says, 'lie and
cheat all the week, and pray off their sins on Sunday. If they
steal a negro, that makes a very large entry to their credit, and
will cover a multitude of peccadilloes and frauds. This kind of