
    CHADELOID CHEMICAL CO. v. CHICAGO WOOD FINISHING CO. et al.
    (Circuit Court, S. D. New York.
    September 30, 1909.)
    Equity (§ 404*) — Masters—Taking Proofs — Objections to Evidence.
    In taking testimony before a master in an equity suit in a federal court, questions objected to for irrelevancy and immateriality should be answered, leaving such objections to be ruled on at final hearing. .
    [Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Equity, Cent. Dig. § 891; Dec. Dig. § 404.*]
    In Equity. Suit by the Chadeloid Chemical Company against the Chicago Wood Finishing Company and others. On motion to compel witnesses to answer questions.
    Sustained in part.
    Duncan & Duncan, for complainant.
    Wm, R. Davis, for defendants.
   LACOMBE, Circuit Judge.

The objection of “incompetency” is raised to all the questions; but nothing has been suggested, either in brief or argument, to show on what theory such an objection is based. The only real objections arc that the testimony sought to be elicited is “irrelevant and immaterial”; but, under the well-known rule laid down by the Supreme Court in Blease v. Garlington, 92 U. S. 1, 23 L. Ed. 521, the questions should be answered, and the relevancy and materiality be ruled on at final hearing.

The patent has not been submitted, and without it the court cannot be sure that the questions in schedule B, numbered 11 to 14, are not an unwarranted attempt to get trade secrets of defendant’s composition.

This motion to require answers to them is therefore denied.  