acknowledge his mistake, he seeks to obtain the reversal of his fault by bringing before the Secretary of State the decision of the Governor in Council which confirms & W. Wodehouse's finding.
W. Wodehouse's duty in dealing with these cases is clearly pointed out to him in Ordinance 2 of 1850.
Section 1 says: "The Magistrate is to investigate the alleged offence in the case of a person charged with a crime or indictable offence within the Colony."
Section III of the same Ordinance says: "If at the close of the investigation it shall appear to the Magistrate or Court that such person as aforesaid is a subject of China and that there is probable cause for believing the said person has committed such crime or offence, it shall be lawful for such Magistrate or Court to commit such person for safe custody to prison."
The duty of Mr. Wodehouse required no further instructions or information respecting his duty; he had it at hand in Oke's Magisterial Synopsis Vol: 2 p. 895.
#27. [When Justices to discharge or commit accused]. In Cox v. Colbridge (1 B. & C. 50) Mr Justice Bayley observed "I think that a Magistrate is clearly bound, in the exercise of a sound discretion, not to commit any one unless a primâ facie case is made out against him by witnesses entitled to a reasonable degree of credit." Justices ought not, therefore, to balance the evidence and decide according as it preponderates, for this would, in fact, be taking upon themselves the functions of the jury, trying the case; but they should consider whether or not the evidence makes out a strong,