196 WINDER v. DIFFENDERFFER

under a regular commission. But the mode of proceeding autho-
rized by the order of the 21st of February, 1829 under which it
was proposed to act, amounts substantially to a commission. That
order authorized an examination before the commissioners ap-
pointed for Baltimore county; or any justice of the peace. The
commissioners having been regularly appointed according to the
act of assembly; (t) must, therefore, for this purpose, be con-
sidered as much the ministerial officers of the court, as if they had
been nominated as commissioners in a commission specially directed
to them in the ancient form.

In regard to the authority given by the order of the 21st of
February, 1829, to take the depositions of witnesses before a jus-
tice of the peace, I am aware that there has been some doubt and
difference of opinion as to the mode of requiring a witness to attend
and testify in such cases; but nevertheless a witness has been com-
pelled to attend before a justice of the peace and to have his depo-
position taken in a case depending in this court, under an order
giving the justice authority thus to act as a commissioner, (t) Of v
late years there have been a great multitude of instances of such
orders; and the convenience and economy of taking testimony in
that mode has been felt to a great extent. It has, in my time,
given rise to no complaint; and it has been sanctioned and approved
by a wide range of experience, (u) I therefore feel myself autho-
rized to place it upon a footing, in all respects, with the mode of
taking testimony under a regular commission. And, consequently,
whether the order, under which this testimony is proposed to be
taken, be considered as amounting to, or in fact as a commission
directed to the officers of the court; or as analogous to an exami-
nation before the auditor, under a decree or order to account; or as
being nothing more than an order authorizing a justice of the peace
to take testimony, I shall sanction, aid, and protect the proceed-
ings under them, in like manner as if the authority had been con-
ferred by a regular commission, (w) A late act of assembly affirms
the power of this court to enforce the attendance of witnesses
before commissioners, or the auditor; and gives a new and addi-
tional mode of compelling the witness to attend, (x) which, in

(t) 1826, ch, 22S; 182t, eh. 159; Park. Pis, Co. Clfen.361.—(I) Onion v. McCo-

mas, mate S3; Furnace v, Ogden, Chancery Proceedings, 1804, fol. 49.—(v) Towns-

hend v. Duncan, ante 81.—(w) Wardel v. Dent 1Dick, 334; Hennegal v. Evance,

12 Ves. 201, Bradshaw v. Bradshaw, 5 Cond. Chan. Rep. 122; Bryson v. Petty, 1

Bland, 182, note; Forum Rom. 118; 1 Harr. Prac. Chan. 447.—(x) 1824, ch. 133.