Waterbury Democrat., 1901-06-20
MRS BARRIERS STORY.
Left Mission Because Rev MT Keller
 Assaulted Her.

Assaulted Her.
 New York, June 2O.-The fate of Thomas G. Barker will be left with the jury before the day closes. The de fense had practically finished when the court rose for the day yesterday and it is not thought Prosecutor Erwin will take long in rebuttal. The defense put Barker and his wife upon the stand and they told their story.
 Mrs Mary Barker, wife of the de- fendant, was called to the stand at the afternoon session. She was expected to break down and become hysterical on the witness stand, but a cooler wo- man has seldom occupied the chair. She was little nervous at first, but this quickly wore off and by the time she was put under oss-examinatfon appeared to have herself under perfect control.
 She said she had been married to Barker for fourteen years and had known Mir Keller about ten years. She said Keller was in the habit of visit ing their home four or five times a week and during these times he often dlned with them. She said she remem- beredlApril 19, 1899, avld an occurrence at ner home on that day in which MT kelleI-was concerned. Before Mrs Barker could say anything further, the, county prosecutor stopped her and ob- Jected to her giving further testimony ln reference as to what occurred at this time on the ground that it was irrelevant. This was the date on which It is alleged by Mrs Barker that MT Keller treated her improperly at her home
 Continuing Mrs Barker said that at different times she had loaned money To MT Keller in sums of from S1O to Szo without her husbands knowing it. She said that she had loaned him in all about $S3. Mrs Barker was questioned as to her connection with the Trinity Mission of which MT Keller was pastor.
 Why did you sever your connection l with rhe mission ?''
 Because MT Keller assaulted me was the answer.
 The prosecutor objected yieorons1v uul Juuge Blair let the question and answer stand. | After that Mr Van Wrinkle asked fIaanyaquestions as to the details of the occurrence referred to, but the court would not permit them to be answered Mrs Barker was not permitted to fell what she meant by the term assault !" nor tell of conversation she had with ner husDand the day before the shoot Ing regarding the alleged assault. or what she had told MT Thompson a nelghbor, some weeks before the shoot ing @ '--Foe E. The defense made every effort to have her tell the story in detail to inc 1ury, but at every point the state ob- Jected and in nearly every instance tha court sustained the objection. The WIT. ness said that during the fortnigbt prlor to the shooting she had seen her husband cry. This was something she had never seen him do before.
 lrs Barker was not allowed to say whether she and her husband had talked about Keller. She said that on one occasion she had told her husband not to do violence to Keller, as it would only revert on her and that they wouJa Tive this thing down.
 .lp s.phGefl cross-ex ton, Mrs Bar. ]sker foldfof othegsleeplassfias of hai. buI band and herself two weeks prior to the shooting. Still her husband went 10 business every day and continued to ride his bicycle. They rode out to, gether the day before the shooting. She said her husband had made arrange. ments to take her to Central park. New York on the day of the shooting.
 She would not say when last she saw Keller before the shooting. As to the accounts against Keller sia kept them separate from her other acc slnts, tear. ing leaves out of an account book and pressing them in her pocketbook. There were eight different dates from Janu iary s29 to December 19.- She would moi produce the book from which the leaves were torn.