Mr. FTHOMAS. The House will do me the justice to believe that I am not ambitions to occupy their attention. Nothing but a stern sense of duty induces metoengage in adis. cussion of this character, for it is one entirely new to my habits of thought and speculation. (That it may be seen that the interests involved here are of no ordinary character, I will commence what I now have to say by giving something like an outline of the vast interests in volved in the State which I in part represent. I assume that it is hardly necessary for me to state, for the proposition is self evident, that the coal interests of Maryland, located, as they are, nearly 200 miles from the sea board, cannot compete, without an duty at all, with not even a revenue duty, with the coal mines of Nova Scotia, lying within 6 miles of water transportation. If there be any gentleman present who wants to have a single ‘fact that will beconclusive upon that point, he may discover it in the declaration I make, that every ton of coal transported from the Broad Top tunnels of Penusylvania or from the Alleghany gegions of maryland to the sea board costs not less than $1 60 for transportation. And when it reaches the sea board, or water transportation, either at this city or Baltimore, an I resume it will be about the same at Philadelp ia, the freight to NewYork will be about the same, I think precisely the same, that the freight is upon coal from the mines of Nova Scotia to the same point. With these facts in mind, gentlemen will see at once that with a duty of only 50 cents perton on Nova Scotia coal all the coal trade of the NewEngland States and of NewYork will be beyond tereach of the coal regions of Maryland, Virginia, and Pennsylvania. They will see at once that when the consider, too, the cheapness of labor in the provinces, it will make most certain our exclusion from the coal markets of the States I have named, and we will be confined to the localities of Baltimore and Washington city and Philadelphia. I call the attention of the House to the' factmentioned heretofore, that $18,000,000 have been spent in making a canal to the Allegheny coal regions of Maryland, and that $12,000,000 have been expended in making a railroad to those regions, and I may interpolate this remark into my argument: drive this coal trade from the Baltimore and Ohio railroad, deprive that road of the income derived from that source, and the entire line of road thron h to the Ohio river is placed in jeopardy. If the road is to lose or have very seriously diminished this coal freight, the whole cost of workin the road. must fall upon the freight to an from the western States, or the may must be abandoned. As it is now, and has been during one season of the year. the locomotive power of the road can be used for transporting coal; during the other portion of the year it can be used for other transportation. And why is this attack made on this interest? Merely to put money in the ocketsofa few wealthy individuals in NewEnglaud and NewYork. Strip it of all its verbiage, and that is just what it amounts to. This Baltimore and Ohio railroad has cost Maryland and the enterprising capitalists 'of Baltimore $30,000,000 and for the last 30 ears it has not yielde on the average more than 2 and 53 linndredths%. perannum. Now, strike down the coal trade on this road, now amounting to about 500,000 tons annu ally, and soon to yield 3 times that amount, and do not gentlemen erceive that they necessarily put in jeopardy the entire interests of the great valley of the ississip i, at least so far as they are connected with this great through line, which at least has had the effect of keeping freights down to something like a moderate figure, by competing with the Pennsylvania Cen tral railroad, and with the NewYork railroads? But a art from this consideration there are 50 t onsand human beings in I’eiinsylvania and Maryland, and Virginia alohe who are dependent upon this coal trade. Let any gentleman, if he pleases, take memoranda from persons about this Hall for the purpoae of contradicting my statements; Is ak from authority, arid no man who is truth iil can contradict what I have to say. I say there are 50,000 human beings who are dependent upon this coal interest. In addition to the capital invested, in this Maryland coal trade of which I have spoken, a railroad has been built some 20 or 30 miles in extent, inthe form of a semicircle, diverging at Cumberland, and coming into the Baltimore and Ohio railroad a ain at Piedmont. There have been embargedin these coal mines at least $30,000,000 of capital, much of which has been sunk, and none of it has yieldeddiberal returns, because of the difficultieswith which these ca italists have had to contend. But give to this itumine us coal interestareasonable protection, and its friends have no fears of the ator e. We know that this coal interest is one of the most growing interests that the hand of industry ever brought to light. We know that a few years ago the anthracite coal mines of Pennsylvania produced some 5, ten, or 15,000 tons annually, while now they send to market some 11 million tons a year. There is nothing to prevent a similar magical effect upon these bitumine us coal regions, unless Congress shall violently interpose, and shall give us neither the inci dental protection of a revenue unit], which is all I ask for, nor the protection, direct and positive, such as is given to the iron and manufacturing interests of the whole country. But, sir, this question concerns ot alone the individual operator engaged in these coal mines of Maryland. The faith and the credit of the whole State are embarked in these enter rises. Maryland has invested in them very argel. If on shake the credit of the State by reducing er income as a stockholder in the Baltimore and Ohio railroad, either imme diately or respectively, the State could not, in the mar et tomorrow, coming in competition with the other States of the Union, and especially with the General Government, raise the means to meet her obligations to her soldiers in the late war. Mr. Chairman, is it right for the Congress of the U.S. to strike this violent and fatal blow at this great interest of the State of Maryland, the largest interest in that State? The coal mines of the Allegheny region are worth more than the whole snperficies of the State. Is it right to take such a step at this particular time? Maryland has emancipated all er slaves. She has done it voluntari, without dictation from any quarter. She has in this way deprived herself of 74 millicus of property that had been resorted to as a sublject ot taxation. Under the new assessment law recently ordered by our Legislature, these $74,000,000 are to be stricken out of the as sessment, which to a small State is a large item. In addition to this, sir, consider the fact that the western part of Maryland has been laid waste by the armies. A short time agofor under the plastic hand of industry that region of country is revivin and beingrebuilt a short time since you might have taken, as I did, a position on some elevated spot of that highly cultivated country, and looking eastward and westwrard, northward and southward, have seen hora living animal within a range of 5 miles around, not a bunch of hay, not a sheaf or stalk of grain. All had been sweit away. How, and for what purpose 1' To fee our own armies. It has not been aid for. It has been seized and appropriate to the purposes of the government. To this hour one technical objection after another has been interposed to the claims for reimbursement; and compensation has never been paid from the national Treasury. Millions of dollars worth of property have been appropriated for the use of the Army, and when we apply to the Government of the U.S. for redress, what is the reply? “ The national finanecs are in an embarrassed condition." Yet now it is proposed to pass here a bill that will deprive us of millions of dollars in the present and in the future, and kill off the rivals of this Nova Scotia coal interest by making almost valucless great highways opened at an enormous expense between the coal fields of Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Maryland, and tln sea board. Sir, I very well remember and it occurs to me just at this moment a remark made by Mr. Webster in remonstrating against the an nexation of Texas. He said that every one accustomed to self examination and self scru tiny discovers that there is in human nature an occult principle which incapacitates a man for taking a very lively interest in the affairs of a community situated very remote from his own locality. That remark seemed to me at the time to be not a very apt illustration of the penetration. the deep analytic power which distinguished the philosophic mind of that great stutesman. I thought then. I think now, that this principle is to be traced to selfishness or self interest. We are not as much agitated by the account of an earthqu‘hke or a conflagration involving the destruction of a whole cit remote as SanFrancisco. We would be stil less adected by the intelligence of the burning of Pekin or any large city of Asia. And why? As quick as electricity the thought flashes upon us we are too remote to be in volved in the calamit. We feel self secure, and sympathize less than we would do if the sufferers in the caldmity were nearer. It is, I fear, a kindred feeling under which this new principle in our tariTT policy may excite less attention. than it should do, if our laws for protecting domestic industry are to be framed wiili too much reference to local interests. If such laws are to be framed in reference to particular latitudes and longitudes and from no other considerations, how long will itbe before every just and right minded man in the country will revolt against the entire system 7 Let me at a case and ask some of the advocates of his/feature of the bill before us how they would act in a certain contin ency. a few citizens of Maryland had crossed the line into Canada during the existence of the reciprocity treaty, and after getting into the juris diction of Canada had gone into the manufacture of cotton and woolen goods; and suppose whenn. tariff bill had been proposed as now a provision had been inserte, instead of a certain fixed duty at licable to all foreign impor tations, that with iin a certain line of latitude: and longitude on the border of Canada, in tended to include the Maryland manufactures, these articles should be brought in at 8.%. advalorem, would not the gentlemen who are opposed to my amendment have rebelled against such a proposition? Suppose during the war a large number of the citizens of e U.S. had crossed into Canada and engaged extensively in wool growing while the reciprocity treaty (was in force, and this House in legislating concerning the importation of wool, should have under or nsitleration a bill proosin avcry small duty 0i wool from the locality wilicre our citizens hid located in Canada, and a reasonable protective duty on wool imported from all other foreign countries, how many wool growers in the U.S. would by their Representativi‘s on this floor sustain so ridiculous a measure! Yctl do not perceive wherein in'princ i ple these supposititious cases differfitour thi”: Suppose position I propose to amend. I invite the riends of this clause of the bill to run a par allel between the cases put, and to discover any essential or vital difference in principle. 1 know it has been said in this debate that it is hard to require those near the coal mines of Nova Scotip. to pay a duty for the protection of the coal interest of Pennsylvania and Maryland. 'Would not the same argument he (1 good in reference to the manufacture of cotton and woolen goods? I insist that any policy that is inaugurated should be national and not seetional. If you exclude competition from abroad with the'cotton and woolen interests of NewEngland, why should you not also exclude unfair competition from abroad with the coal interests of Maryland and Pennsylvania? Why should you exclude competition with one branch of industry and not with another? I tell on, sir, that until statesmen come up upon the ‘gh platform of patriotism and cast aside all selfish considerations, until all interests are placed upon an equality before the law, and there shall be no distinction between the protection alrorded to one or the other, giving to the people of each locality an equal chance taderive the local values, we will1 not either legislate justlyor for the prosperity of the whole country. Speaking under the permission of the House I am reluctant to trespass any further, an thank the House 5r its indulgence.