TOWNSHEND v. DUNCAN. 57

may be issued as of course; or the proofs may be taken before an
examiner, which are returned, and an order of publication passes,
as in all other cases, (f) The report of a master ought to be
without any unnecessary recitals, .is succinct as may be; and con-
fined to that which has been referred to him; for as to all else, it
may be treated as a nullity; and it should reserve the matter
clearly for the judgment of the Chancellor, who alone is the judge.
(g) But if a master conceives it to be proper, under the peculiar
circumstances of the case, to make a special report, in doing so,
he is not to set forth the evidence, with his opinion upon it; but
only the bare facts for the opinion of the court, in the same manner
as in a special verdict, (h) unless he should be specially directed to
give his reasons, (i) But under a decree for an account, he may,
if he thinks proper, state special matter, although he has no direc-
tion for that purpose. (j) If, however, a master is directed to
ascertain a particular fact, he ought himself to draw the conclu-
sion from the evidence before him, and not merely to state the
circumstances, (k)

Besides these masters in chancery, there are other standing
officers of the Court of Chancery of England, whose duties are, in
some respects, similar to those of masters, called Examiners,
who are appointed by the master of the rolls. The office of the
examiners is to examine, upon oath, the witnesses on both sides,
that are brought before them in any case, as also parties in con-
tempt; and to put their answers and depositions in writing; which
they are to keep close and private until publication. But if the
witnesses reside more than twenty miles from the place where the
court is held, then a commission issues to certain commissioners,
nominated by the parties, who are authorized and directed, to take
the depositions of such witnesses in private; which are returned
and kept secret, until an order of publication is passed. The
examination of witnesses was originally in chancery before the
master of the rolls, who was one of the judges of the court; and
therefore, such examinations now by a master, by an examiner, or
by commissioners, must be considered as a delegation, by the
court, of a part of its authority to them. (l)

(f) Beam. Ord. 220.—(g) Dick v. Milligan, 2 Ves. jun. 24; Jenkins v. Briant, 9
Cond. Chan. Rep. 427.—(h) Marlborough v. Wheat, 1 Atk. 454.—-(i) Cook v. Col-
lingridge, 4 Cond. Chan. Rep. 293;—(j) Anon. 2 Atk. 621.—(k) Lee v. Willock, 6
Ves. 605.—(1) Forum Rom, 124; I Harr. Prac. Chan. 430, 482.