Middlebury register. (Middlebury, Vt.) 1886-1937, 1913-01-03
ADDISON COUNTY COURT.
Continued from Page IL


the fountain heal in London for many
years. Upon returning to this country
he engaged largely in various enter
prises and built the splen id home on
the West Salisbury road, in which he
died about four years ago. In 1866 he
was married to Miss Harriet Jones of
Salisbury, who survives him and is the
of this will in question.
They had two children, son and a
daughter, who are both deceased, the
daughter having married and died with
out issue.
The widow, Harriet P. Smith, is the
chief proponent of the will in dispute.
That is to say, explaining the legal
phraseology, that she is the person who
is chiefly concerned in having this will
allowed as the last will and testament
of Columbus Smith. The attorneys for
the proponents are w. B. c. Stickney
of Bethel and P. M. Mellon and Edwin
Lawrence of Rutland.
The contestants OF record are: Mrs.
Anna M. Perry of Gardner, Mass, a
grand niece of Mrs. Smith and Fred
Page of Ludlow, grand nephew and
present railroad station agent at Lud-
low. Mrs. Charles French of Brandon
is also interested as being another
grand niece of Mr.. Smith, but is not a
contestant of record. The only one of
these parties contestant mentioned in
the will is the afore mentioned chief
contestant and appellant, Mrs. Perry,
who is awarded in the will fifty dollars
out of an estate supposed to be worth
somewhere in the neighborhood of two
millions. But as there is no inventory
presently accessible this may be con-
sidered matter of doubt. The attor-
neys for these contestants, besides l..
C. Russell of Middlebury, are H. w.
Blake of Gardner, Mass, a former
well-known young lawyer at Island
Pond, this state, and now of the firm of
Carney & Blake at Gardner and R. W..
Simonds of st. Johnsbury.
1t took about an hour Monday after
noon to get jury empaneled, three out
of the q called to the box being eX-
cused for cause by the court and six
going out of the lime light on peremp-
tory challenges. Finally at A O'Clock
the case was started, but it did not get
along very far that day.
Mrs. Alice Williamson Seymour of
Middlebury was put on as the first
witness for the proponents to prove hel
signature as witness to a document
offered as will Of Mr.. Smith made il
1899, and she Identified her signature
and those of the companion witnesses
Then came up the first legal battle.
1t was claimed and argued on tn,
part of the conte 5tants that the pro
ponents were not properly in court be
cause they had not filed any declaration
, Against that the counsel for tn,
other side held that the will itself wa!
their declaration, that it was a properl.
executed and valid will and had com,
into court on the contestants appeal
that the claim of the contestants tina
the will had not been legally executed
and that the testator was incompetent
to make a will was assumed to be wrong
by their having taken the appeal anC
brought the case into court on othel
grounds.
Tuesday morning the taking of testi
mony was resumed and was confined t
the testimony of Mrs. Seymour, Tow
Clerk Joseph M. Burke of Middlebury
Mrs. Cicily Kirby of Salisbury, Lane!
w. Forbes of Middlebury, John Hous
ton of Middlebury Dr. E. H. Martin O.
Middlebury and George Briggs of Mont
pelier, formerly Of the law firm OF
Ormsbee & Briggs of Brandon.
The testimony of most of these per
sons was mainly to the fact that they
had signed wills or codicils to wills fol
Mr.. Smith, but Mr.. Forbes and Mr.
Houston testified, as did Mr.. Seeley
also, that they had had business tran
sactions with Mr.. Smith covering man.
years and including the period of tn,
making of the will of 1899 and the sub
sequent codicils and that they though
him of sound mind during all thes
periods.
The testimony of Dr. Martin an,
Mr.. Briggs was of different character
that he had treated Mr. Smith profes
sionally from 1901 to 1903 and that il
March of the latter year he had signeC
one of the codicils to the will and tina
at that time the testator was of SCUM,
mind, in his opinion, but that later il
that year Mr.. Smith was taken to DR.
Berry's sanatorium and later to the DR.
Sparhawk sanatorium in Burlington 70
treatment for mental trouble, this be
ing in October, 1903.
Mr.. Briggs testified as lawyer tina
he had done legal business for Mr.
Smith while a lawyer in Brandon TO
many years, including the period dur
ing which the disputed will and codici
We're executed and that he considered
the testator of sound mind. But he
admitted that he and Mr.. Smith haC
had a disagreement in regard to thu
propriety of the wording of a portion o.
the documents, still, however. assert
ing that this matter did not change hi
opinion of Mr.. Smiths soundness o
mind at the time.