The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1901-06-22

wanted to know-namely. why did Bar
ker shoot Keller-but, said he. you
have. a right to draw conclusions and
outrage possible" Continuing, Mr..
Van Wrinkle said:
IF Barker thought the shooting the
just thing to do. you may legally ac-
quit him. If the story of outrage was
true, the shooting was justtiablc, or if
Barker believed the story told by his
wife and he acted on that belief and
was acting in a delirium, even if the
story was not true he should be acquit-
ted
Acted on the Story.
Barker heard the story and acted on
It. AS the story has not been admitted.
you cannot say he was not justified.
He says he was justified and that any
man would do the same under like cir
cumstances. You must stand on the
facts as they are presented to you.
''The church has not been assailed.
The church stands for the truth and
not for the suppression of the truth
The church is not made up of minis
ters alone. 1t is made up of congrega
tions. Ministers may do just what
you or might DO. If you take up the
book of prayer.
Mr. Van Wrinkle was here about to
read from the book of prayer, but was
prevented by the court.
Barker" said Mr.. Van Wrinkle, "led
good life, and his wife was lnsulted.
She stood for all that was good in this
world, and his happiness was centered
In her. Along came Keller. He visited
the Barker family frequently. Keller
and Barker We're almost like brothers.
Keller visited the house four or five
times week, and Barker gave him a
wheel that they might ride out to-
gether. Keller, man of 40, had all the
opportunity for the crime charged.
Something happened. Keller ceased
his visits to Barker's house and sud
denly became n stranger there. What
happened was not known to Barker un-
til January. 1901. In his testimony
Keller denied that he borrowed money
from Mrs. Barker. He did pay money
back, and the receipts are In evidence.
Men do not pay back money they do
not owe.
Barker's Peculiar Actions.
"In January, 1901, Barker learned of |
the assault and framed his mind to do |
the shooting. Witnesses testified to his |
peculiar actions at that time and also |
to the fact that the night before the
shooting he was unable to sleep. On
that fatal Sunday morning he had in
mind a trip to Central park. He did
not go out to shoot Keller. lie was not
the sane man that he had been two
weeks previous. Everything seemed
dark to him. He thought about the
law and redress. The brutes in Pater-
son had not been sufficiently punished.
Then. in that state of mind, he met
Keller and shot him.
at has been said that Keller was
shot from behind and that Barker lay
in ambush for him. The testimony in
his respect Is contradictory. | do not
lay much heed to the opinions of Drs.
McGill and Strasser as to the course
If the bullet. The fact Is that Barker
net Keller, and the fact that he was a
minister and that it was Sunday MORN
ne magnified Kellers crime In Bar
Iers mind. On the way from Keller's
'ouse to the police station Barker said
le hoped that he had killed him. The
estlmony all shows that up to the
ime of the shooting Barker was a
saceful, loving man of good disposi.
Ion and good character.
"As to the legal defense of insanity,
obody knows much about insanity.
Experts differ on the subject You
lay sny that the man committed the
ct under delusion. and that would
him legally. Because a man