The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-02-19

branch OF national industry. These several ar
guments are put with great force and ctearness;
and the report concludes, as our readers are
aware with recommendation to Congress to
pass the bill in the shape proposed.
To this suggestion few who have perused the
report with care will demur. With that admir-
able logic which generally characteristics papers
emanating from the committees of Congress,
every advantage is set i'm so strong light. and
every objection so calmly discussed and so
completely refuted that it requires no ordinary
confidence in ones own judgment to question
the wisdom of the finalaeduction; and if we ven
ture at this time, to criticise the bill present
ed to Congress. we do so not because we differ
on any single point of principle from the COM
mittee. but rather from fear that they have
not carried out their conclusions to their egiti-
mate and natural extent. In what they have
said we entirely concur; but we would humbly
suggest that they have not said enough. In a
word, we cannot discover any valid grounds for
excluding one most important commodity
coal-from the proposed interchange of pro-
ducts.
But we can see two substantial reasons for
comprising it in the list of free, or articles
at greatly reduced duty. In the first
place. the coal trade is of such Importance
to the Lower Provinces, that it is very question
tionable whether they would agree to any in
terchange from which it was excluded. In the
year 1852, the trade Of which has been taken
by the committee as the basis Of their calcula-
tons the export of coal from the colonies to this
country was 81 ,036 tons; amounting in value to
nearly one-fourteenth ofthe total exports Of the
colonies exclusive of Canada) to the United
States. This item is too considerable to be
overlooked by the colonists, and they may very
probably decline to enter into any arrangement
in which their interests in this particular are
disregarded.
Again: We conceive that reduction of the
duty on coal would not be less beneficial to us
than to the colonists. part of the sixty cents
ton now levied on bituminous coalwould be saved
in most instances to the consumer. In those
branches Of industry in which anthracite can
not be used as a substitute for bituminous
coal-such as gas factories and certain de-
scriptions Of iron factores-the repeal of
the duty would be an immediate gain to the
manufacturer, and, Of course, an ultimate
gain to the consumers Of gas, iron manufacture
ers, &c. This, when the enormous and increas-
ing consumption of gas is borne in mind, would
be no inconsiderable boon to the public. IfNova
Scotian coal could be laid down here at SIS
ton, as we have no doubt it could were the du-
ty removed, it would tend to cheaper many
commodities in the production Of which coal is
used, and would add materially to our indivi-
dual comforts.
If any clamor for protection to our collicries
our reply should be brief The colonists are
compelled to extract their coal from pits inland,
to convey it by very imperfect means Of transit
to the sea-board, and, finally, to transmit it in
ships to our ports our coal is at hand, at the
doors of the market. If the difference in the
cost Of transportation and light be not suf
fcient protection to our producers of coal, they
are burthen to the community, and had better
turn their attention to some other calling We
respectfully recommend the suggestion to the
notice Of Congress.