The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1866-07-03
A Compromise on Coal!

A Compromise on Coal!
Our northern friends who are now legis-
lating for themselves in Congrcss--protect-
Ing their manufactures and taxing our cot
ton-have just exhibited another specimen
Of their fairness and consideration Tor the
South. The new Tariff bill imposes duty
Of one; dollar and twenty-five cents per
ton upon bituminous coal brought across
the ocean, and only fifty cents per ton upon
that imported from Nora Scotia. This ap-
peared so singular that even Mr.. THAp-
DEUS STEVENS called attention to II rs an
apomaly-characteri the whole bill as
"an excellent tariff for New England"
Mr.. MooRuEAp, Of Pennsylvania, stated
tina, the f,fty.cent tax on the Nova Scotia
coal was a compromise, for the dement, Oh
the New England manufacturers. ihey
cot their coal from Nova Scotia, and he
thought there ought to be this discrimns-
,ion in their favor. Now, the disinterestcd-
ness of this Mr.. MooRHEAD is found in the
fact that his constituents are not at oil con-
ccrned in the oituminous coal trade the
Pennsylvania interest is entirely in anthra-
cite coal, and that coal is protected most
grstuitously by duty Of one dollar and
fifty cents per ton, while there is no genuine
anthracite coal in the world outside of four
hundred and seventy square miles in the
State Of Pennsylvania Pennsylvania
could we'll afford to make this "compro-
MISE" The fact is, this so-callcd "com-
promise " was made by one party only with
itself. and il is therefore soleciSln so to
style il, since compromise implies an
agreement between t,ro. The injustice
Of il was so patent that Mr.. KELLEY,
Of Pennsylvania, one of the bitterest OF
Radicals, opposed it very earnestly. He
declared that he spoke "for those who
"were voicelcss in that house-the deluded
"and poverty stricken people of the in
surrectionary district, which, it should
abe known, is the prominent bituminous
"coal district of our country" His State
having no especial interest in the matter,
he argued it, he said, in behalf of the
erich ana wide bituminous coal-felds Of
"the South, and especially those of Viz
"ginia and North Carolina" Mr.. KELLEY
then proceeded with his argument, in
which he contended that the reduced ta-
riff on Nova Scotia coal was not only to
favor manufacturers, but citizens o. the
United States who had purchased coal
mines in Nova Scotia and were importing
coal thence to the New England manuiac-
tories. He invcighed against extending
such favor to persons who had gone ont
of the country TO invest their money.
They should invest their money at home.
The opinion of his constituents was that
Congress would "bettcr promote the inte-
"rests of our whole country by promoting
"those of Virginia and North Carolina
ethan they would by legislating SO as to
"advance those ola .tetc imcrtcon patriots
"who have invested their capital in Nova
"Scotia or any other foreign country"
Mr.. KELLEY ridiculcd the discrimina-
ton which taxed coal from Great Britain
two-thrds more than that from Nova SEQ
tia. which was SO near that the charge on
Its transportation was merely nominal. lie
said this was reversing the former rule of
the Government, which increased the du-
ties as the distance Of transportation was
iminished-imposing, for instance, only
half as much upon goods from east OF the
Cape Of Good Hope as upon those shipped
from this side of that cape.
The coal mines of North Carolina and
Virginia were referred to with much earn
estness hy Mr.. KELLEY. They should he
fostered and developed rs the true mode
of favoring New England, as that would
establish competition through our own
mines, and thus check excessive charges
for the Nova Scotia coal. Moreover, II
would increase the demand at home for the
fabrics Of the New England manufactu-
rers.
In the course of his remarks Mr.. kEI.-
LEY quoted from an essay in the Washing
ton Chronicle on the subject. In this the
writer contends that Virginia coal is equal
TO the Goals of the British Provinces for all
the purposes of the New England manu-
iacturers, is not further from them, taking
q general centre, than the Nova Scotia coal,
and, like that, is close to tide-water. lie
considered Virginia as having been blinded
by an infatuation which prevented the de-
yelopmcnt of her mines but condemns
Congress for pursuing policy likewise de-
structive to the Virginia golfers. BY the
reciprocity treaty with Great Britain the
coal from Pictou and Sidney was admitted
duty free; and this seriously injured Viz
ginia. The writer says:
"At one time Richmond enjoyed an ex-
port trade in coal, but since the reciprocity
treaty it has vanished. Enterprise and
capital have gone from Philadelphia, New
York, and Boston to develop Acadian coal
fields, while it is denied to Virginia-first,
because Congress legslates against her
and in favor OF a foreign rival and secondly,
because her people are poor, impractical,
and soured by poverty and Distress"
Mr.. KELLEY has certainly done no more
than simple justice in exposing the injury
which this feature of the Tax bill will do
70 the domestic interests of the United
States. We apprehend, however, that his
efforts will be of little force in the way of
disturbing the compromise " made 10y
one side affecting 10 represent both. ii is