Courier Democrat. (Langdon, N.D.) 1891-1920, 1903-11-26
Drawing to a Close.
Continued from First Page,

Continued from First Page)
of bills, or whether he had received it
after coming to town.
FRANK DELLING, at the time of the
homicide having place of business
next door to Dr. Reilly's drug store, was
called and gave testimony to stepping
into the drug store that morning. His
attention being called by the unusually
loud tones in which the conversation
was being carried on. What he heard
there was in substance about the same
as testified to by Witnesses Reilly, Ward
and Dawson covering the story of what
had happened that morningat the Barry
farm. He said that Barry acted queer
and he should judge was crazy.
TH0s BARRY, another brother of the
defendant. was the last witness put on
the stand for the defense before the
court took its evening adjournment.
His evidence had to do with the char
acteristics of different members of the
family, bearing particularly upon their
peculiarities and that of William Barry
the defendant. He testified that in the
years 80 and 80 he and his brother
Bill lived together. Defendant was
unreasonable and hard to- get along with,
he had blamed witness without cause
for many things. He had a habit of
jumping up suddenly and catching hold
of witness by the coat. During the last
year they were living together his
brother had great difficulty in going to
sleep. They slept together. He had a
habit of jumping up all of sudden TAX
ing the bed clothing along with him. 1t
was at this time that defendant was hav-
ing considerable trouble about his land
The period of worry about this matter
lasted about six months, and while the
spells lasted he would not speak when
addressed until several minutes after
wards.
There were Zines when it was the
next thing to impossible to remain
with him. He formed the habit of
jumping up without the slightest
provocation and kicking the chair
he had been sitting on across the
:. room. Witness would then grab
:@hold of him.
After witness had talked to him for a
while he would become paciied and
quiet. He appeared to have no memory
of business matters or otherwise after
getting over one of these spells. At the
time witness was excused the evening
adjournment was taken.
FRIDAY.
Mrs. RICHARD BARRY. wife of the de-
PENDANTS brother. took the stand first
and proved quite an important witness
Until coming out to Dakota she had
lived in the same locality as the Barry
family in Ontario all her life. At the
time of their marriage her husband was
rational and all right. Two years after
wardsin 94 and '95 there was an apparent
change and he became moody and silent.
At one time he had delusion that he
was going to be hanged and frequently
got the idea that his life was in danger.
He appeared to realize that he was
steadily losing his power of reason and
made statement of his affairs to the
priest. In his mind there were all kinds
of people after him and he could not be
induced to go to bed without being al
lowed to take pitch fork into the room
with him. Subsequently he was con-
fined in the asylum at London, Ont. for
several months. They came out here in
81 since which time he had been all
right.
Cross examined witness stated that
the condition of her husband January
4, 1901 was that of sane man. States
counsel endeayored to bring out that
what he had were apparently decisions
and not insanity. That he had been re-
fused admission to the asylum the first
time application was made as the doctors
didn't find sufficient grounds. Witness
showed that the reason was because of
an error in the making out of the papers
by the authorities.
On the redirect examination witness
testified to being at defendant, William
Barry's farm shortly after the homicide
and with her husband remained there
until spring.
Witness told of finding blue print
apron covered with blood. To the
best of aer knowledge it was such
one as she had seen Mary Ann Barry
wear when she was there in Novem-
Der, few weeks before. It was
found in q corner of shed or sum-
mer kitchen. There were also pair
of wonan's shoes, bearing traces of
being washed and indications of
blood still remaining on them.
The court held that witness was not
competent to prove that the apron found
belonged to the defendants sister, Mary
Ann and that portion of the testimony
was not allowed to 60 to the jury.
w. NJ. PRINCE was again put ON the
stand to swear to the Official court re-