§ The House divided: Ayes, 50; Noes, 17—Majority, 33.
§ The House went into Committee.
§ Lord Howick
said, he had a claim on the hon. Member's indulgence after having consented to the Committee, and he hoped, therefore, the hon. Member would make no opposition to the Amendment which he was about to propose. The hon. Member must be aware that, as the law stood before, the party committing or attempting a highway-robbery, where injury was inflicted, suffered the extreme penalty of the law. His (Lord Howick's) object was, to place the law in that respect as it was before. He would, therefore, move, that, after the words "security" these words be inserted, "not doing any bodily harm to the person so robbed."
was obliged to resist the insertion of these words, because it had been truly said by the noble Lord, they would go to leave the law as it was before the introduction of the Bill; which, in that shape, would afford no real amelioration, and the public would be deceived by, anti dissatisfied with it. If the robbery itself did not deserve death, surely the assault by which it was attended ought not to make it so punishable, inasmuch as the most violent and severe assault was visited, he believed, with only two years' imprisonment, it being always borne in mind that, where life was endangered in cases of robbery the capital punishment remained the same
§ The Committee divided: Ayes, 33; Noes, 28—Majority, 5.
§ The House resumed, the Committee to sit again.