The Barre daily times. (Barre, Vt.) 1897-1959, 1922-10-25
is PAYING FOR
COST OF SUIT
d. P. Lefebvre Denies Any
Other Person or Company
Paying Any Part
IN $4,000 ACTION
AGAINST G. v. r. r.
Is Suing For Deaths of His
Wife and Daughter at
w. Berlin

The plaintiff in the $4,000 suit
brought by d. P. Lefebyre of North
| field, administrator, against the Cen
tral Vermont Railway company fol
| the death Of the plaintiffs wife and
daughter on the crossing at West Ber-
lin June IL, last, confined his testi-
mony in Washington county court this
morning, Percy G.. Smith Of Montpel-
ier, civil engineer, being on the stand
and being questioned as to the map
prepared by Mr.. Smith.
| Later the plaintiff went on the
stand He gave testimony relative to
Mrs. Lefebvre's care of their home and
Of their son. On rossexamination he
was asked if he was paying the ex-
penses Of the trial in his capacity of
administrator. He answered that he
was and denied that any other person
or company was paying any part Of
the expenses.
| The witnesses yesterday were
George Bardis, driver Of the automo-
bile, Edith Blodgett, who was pas
senger in the car, Anna Wilfore, whp
was also a passenger, Edward Provost,
William Donahue, w. L. Herring, Al.
| j. Provost, and r. J. Davis, granite
men In West Berlin, who hire land
from the Central Vermont in the vi
einity of the crossing, +. w. Shepard,
who drove an ambulance to the scene
of the accident, and p. @. Smith, the
defendants engineering expert.
A contest arose between Attorney
George L. Hunt for the plaintiff and
Attorney John w. Redmond for the
company over the admission of lease
of Central Vermont property held by
Mr.. Davis. Mr. Davis had testified
that the west end of the derrick track
of his granite plant and other proper
ty was on land which he leased from
the Central Vermont for five years,
from Jan. |, 1912. The document and
map of the locality which went with
it were prepared by the railroad peo
pie, he testified. Since Jan. L, leI7,
he had continued to use the land and
pay the annual rental, he stated.
Mr.. Hunts claim was that the rail-
road assumed a greater degree Of re-
sponsibility when it allowed artificial
structures to be erected on its right
of way for money than would be the
case where the track ran through q
natural formation which hindered vi
sion. Mr.. Redmond objected to the adj
mission of the lease on the ground |
that 1t was irrelevant TO the case
the company received money |
for such use of their land or not.
Judge Frank L. Fish called on Mr.. |
Hunt for authorities and the lease was |
not admitted at that time.
A. j. Provost also testified to an
by which he paid the
Central Vermont in order to maintain |
structures on their land. He had
written contract, he stated. but did |
not know where it was. His granite
she'd was not operating on the after
noon of June IL, when the accident
occurred, he said.
Mr.. Davis testified, on cross exam
nation, that he had known the local
ty of the accident for 80 years. Dur
ng all that time sidetracks were in
ise near the crossing, he testified. His
lerrick has been situated there for 30
rears also, he stated. Other derricks
rave been in the vicinity since 1914
n 1915. He stated that he knew of
he ramp beside the track onto which
he car was turned just before the
Iccident, and that it had been there
or six or eight years.
+. w. Shepard testified to seeing a
oal car on sidetrack when he drove
N ambulance TO the station about 10
minutes after the accident, and stated
hat he saw the same car there when
e drove down again in his own auto
Mobile in the evening.
Map Goes Back to 1889. u
The testimony of Mr.. Smith occu- !
led large part of the afternoon. A
ertified copy Of court order made /,
a 1889 regarding the laying out of
ighway was produced as used by Mr.. I
mith in surveying for his plan Of the /
rene Of the accident and vicinity. Mr.. I
mith stated that his plan coincided d
18th the directions for the laying a
ut Of the highway except that the
Magnetic needle had changed its di
sction since 1882 The map was Of
red in evidence and Attorney Red
lond began a cross-examination TO
nd out whether he would agree to
ne admission of the map, or not.
He stated that perhaps one-ffth OF :
he highway. as described in the old =
,urt order. was included in his map
he survey made by Mr.. Smith start .
I at a point ~on the east bank of =
le Dog river" according 20 the court :
der. and Mr.. Smith stated that he =
'ok the center Of the bridge first east :, Il
the West Berlin crossing as his =
arting point The point at which he = :
arted was the line of the edge Of !.
ie abufment on the east side Of The :,
yer. he made his measurements on r
.pt. and last. he stated. =,
In regard to the grade Of the high !.
av east Of the crossing. Mr.. Smith !,
stifed that Il was u per cent at =
me distance from the track. but was =
ilv slight in the last 20 feet. From I,
r. center Of the sidetrack 10 the cen =
r of the main line was q distance
40 feet. he testified
He was asked By Mr. Redmond a.
whether he could see down the main