Mr. SUMNER. The object of the amendment is to bring the bill back to where it was at 1st. The Senate will remember that in committee a motion prevailed by which the duty of 50 cents per ton on the coal mentioned was raised to $1 50. I am at a loss to understand the precise object of this increased tax on coal. There are strong reasons against any tax on coal; and the reasons are stronger still against this increased tax. Its movers must have an object. What is it? It seems that there are imported into the U.S. about 500,000 tons, being 350,000 tons from the British Provinces and 150,000 tons from Great Brit aim. And this coal it is proposed to tax at the rate of $1 50 a ton in gold. If this same amount of importation continued, this tax would yield $750,000 in gold a handsome addition to the revenue. But I am sure the tax is not imposed on this account. It is im osed, of course, with some vague hope of benefit to the coal interest. But here, as we look at it, we are mystified. Is it supposed that the price of coal throughout the country will be raised to this extent? The idea is monstrous. There are some 22 million tons now produced, which if raised in price according to this tax will cost the country 33 million gold dollars in addition to the Present price. This might be advantageous to certain proprietors but it would be damaging to the country. Nobody can expect this. The object, then, is something else. I will not say that it is merely to take advantage of the States that do not produce coal, for this would be sheer opPression. I suppose that it must be to exclude foreign coal, and thus open to that extent the market to domestic do." But this tax will be positively opPressive to coal purchasers in NewEngland, to say nothing of NewYork. Nature has denied coal to this region of country, or rather nature has placed the natural supply for this region out side of our political jurisdiction. It is in Nova Scotia, on the other side of our boundary line. Coal in abundance is there, easily accessible by water, and therefore transported comparatively cheap. But there is another part of our country which has a different supply. On the other side of the mountain ridge which separates the sea coast from the valleys of the est, is an infinite coal field, the source of untold wealth, which, beginning in the mount ains and filling WestVirginia and western Pennsylvania stretches through the valley of the Ohio, enriching the States that border upon it, and then crossing the Mississippi stretches through other States beyond, even to Colorado. This is the greatest coal field, as it is also the greatest corn field in the world. It is magnificent beyond comparison. This is the natural resource for the immense region west of the Alleghanies. But why should NewEngland, which has a natural resource comparatively near at home, be compelled at a great sacrifice to drag her coal from these distant supplies? The supplies are bountiful, and we share in the wealth which they contribute to the whole country. I hear that at Pittsburg people complain of the price of coal when they pay only 2 dollars a ton currency. But imported coal, in NewEngland costs at the mine 2 dollars a ton in gold. Add to this 3 or 4 dollars a ton for freight. And now it is proposed to pile on this a duty of more than 2 dollars currency. If the people of Pittsburg complain of coal at 2 dollars a ton, what must the people of Boston say when you make it 9 dollars? Is this just? Is it practically wise? But I forget, there can be no wisdom without justice. If it be said that the interests of NewEng land are protected even by the bill before the Senate, I have to say in reply that no interest of hers is protected at the expense of the rest of the country. All that we ask is fair play. Let it be shown that there is any part of the country which will suffer from the favor you accord to NewEngland to the extent that her coal purchasers must suffer from the favor you accord to the distant coal owners of the mount ains, and I will do what I can to see justice done. I ask nothing but that justice which I am always willing to accord. We constitute parts of one country with common interests, and the prosperity of each is bound up in the prosperity of all. It is said that this proposed tax will be of advantage to the Cumberland coal in the mountains of Maryland. Perhaps; but not to any considerable extent. I understand that not more than 60,000 tons of Nova Scotia coal are imported in competition with that of?ji This is mainly at Providence, where it is used in the manufacture of iron. But the Cumberland coal is so completely adapted to glass works, railways, ocean steam ships, blacksmiths' forges, that it may be said to command the market exclusively. Nature has given to it this monopoly. Why not be content? There are peculiar reasons why coal should be cheap, whether viewed as a necessary or as a motive power. As a necessary it enters into the comforts of life. As a motive power it is the substitute for water power. What reason can you give for a tax on the motive power from coal which is not equally strong for a tax on the motive power from water, unless it be that one is “black” and the other is “white?” But I plead that you shall not needlessly add to the public burden in a particular portion of the country. I have already alluded to the cheapness of coal at Pittsburg. In other places it is cheaper still. At Pomeroy, in Ohio, it is $1 40 a ton; and at Cumberland itself it is $1 50 a ton; always in currency. And yet NewEngland is to pay $1 50 tax in gold, being more than the coal is worth to its producer, besides the large cost of transportation. Next after the industry of a people is cheap coal as an element of national prosperity. Without it even industry will lose much of its activity and variety. It is coal which has vitalized and quickened all the mighty energies of Efngloand. From coal have come all the various of her manufactories, and these again have furnished the freights for her ships, so that she has become not only a great manufaction. Coal is the author of all this. Coal is in fuel under the British pot which makes it boil. It ought to do the same for us, and even more if you will let it. Therefore I end as I began: tax coal as little as possible.