In making this motion, he called attention to what seemed to him a new illustration of the barbarism of Slavery. An aged colored person had been excluded from the cars and dropped in the mud. He thought the incident discreditable, and that it was the duty of Congress to interfere. The following dialogue then ensued. MR. HOWE (of Wisconsin). I should like to ask the Senator from Massachusetts, as a question of law, whether, if this railroad company, being common carriers, should drop any person or refuse to carry any person who offered them their fare, they would not be liable as the law now stands, without any express enactment? MR. SUMNER. If you ask me the question as a lawyer, I should say they would be liable; but the experience here, as I believe, is, that this liability is not recognized. The Senator knows well, that, under the influence of Slavery, human rights are disregarded, and those principles of law which he recognizes are set aside. Therefore it becomes the duty of Congress to interfere and specially declare them. MR. HOWE. Would the effect of the amendment be any more than a reënactment of the existing law? MR. SUMNER. That was said of the Wilmot Proviso, as the Senator will remember. The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted, Yeas 19, Nays 18; so the amendment was agreed to. It was concurred in by the House, and approved by the President, March 3, 1863. This provision, though applicable to a single road, seemed to decide the principle. But it was not so regarded by the other railroads in Washington, which continued to exclude colored persons, often under painful circumstances. * * * * * February 10, 1864, Mr. Sumner called attention to this subject by the following resolution:-- “_Resolved_, That the Committee on the District of Columbia be directed to consider the expediency of further providing by law against the exclusion of colored persons from the equal enjoyment of all railroad privileges in the District of Columbia.” Mr. Sumner explained the resolution. MR. PRESIDENT,--It is necessary that I should call attention to a recent outrage which has occurred in this District. I do it with great hesitation. At one moment I was inclined to keep silence, believing that the good name of our country required silence; but since it has already found its way into the journals, I cannot doubt that it ought to find its way into this Chamber.