ART. 16] WITNESSES AND TESTIMONY. 445

used as if taken before an examiner: or if the court shall have so
ordered, such evidence shall be reduced to writing by counsel in the
same manner as bills of exceptions now are at common law, and after
the same shall have been signed by the judge or judges before whom
the testimony was taken, shall, with the documentary proof at the same
time offered and admitted, be filed as part of the proceedings to be
used as if taken before an examiner.

If an appeal is proposed to be taken, the proper practice under this section
is either to file written exceptions, as is done when testimony is taken before
an examiner, or the rulings should be presented by a bill of exceptions or
certificate. The mere stenographic record that a question was objected to,
ruled inadmissable, and exception noted, is not sufficient. Lemmert v. Lem-
mert. 103 Md. 65.

The court may by special rule or general order direct that when testimony
is upon objection ruled inadmissible, it shall only be incorporated in the
record upon appeal at the request and expense of the party propounding the
questions. Proper and improper practice under this section. Rules governing
the production of evidence in equity. Schnepfe v. Schnepfe, 108 Md. 146.

1904, art. 16, sec. 244. 1888, art. 16, sec. 226. Rule 46.

262. Upon any petition, motion or other interlocutory application
for the hearing and determination of which evidence may be required,
the court or judge thereof may order testimony to be taken before an
examiner, or before a justice of the peace, upon such notice, and in
such manner as the court or judge may think proper to direct, to be
used at the hearing of such matter.

Ibid. sec. 245. 1888. art. 16, sec. 227. 1860, art. 16. sec. 141. 1826, ch. 222, sec. 1.

263. All commissions which shall be issued to take testimony in
causes pending in any court of equity of this State shall be issued and
directed to two persons to be named and appointed by the said court, or
the judge thereof.

See notes to sec. 264.

As to the issue of commissions by the clerks of the courts having jurisdic-
tion, see art. 17, sec. 33.

Ibid. sec. 246. 1888, art. 16, sec. 228. 1860, art. 16, sec. 142. 1795. ch. 88, sec. 4.

1799, ch. 79, sec. 6. 1829, ch. 159. 1840. ch. 109. sec. 5.

1852, ch. 173, sec. 2.

264. A commission to take testimony may issue to one person with
consent of the parties.

If a defendant receives notice of the name of plaintiff's commissioner, his
neglect to name another commissioner is a waiver of his right to have two
commissioners. Billingslea v. Smith. 77 Md. 516; Sewell v. Gardner, 48 Md.
183.

Commissioners regularly appointed under this and the preceding section,
are for this purpose as much ministerial officers of the court as if they had
been nominated in a commission in ancient form. Winder v. Diffenderffer. 2
Bl. 196.

Held that the 27th rule of the court of common pleas of Baltimore city
could not be construed to contravene sections 263. 264 and 265. Seweil v.
Gardner, 48 Md. 182.

Ibid. sec. 247. 1888, art. 16. sec. 229. 1860. art. 16, sec. 143. 1841. ch. 22. sec. 6.
1842, ch. 229. sec. 6. 1878. ch. 202.

265. Where a commission to take testimony in chancery shall issue
to two commissioners, only one shall act on the same day, unless both