The Sun.
London, England, 1833-01-31 00:00:00

THE TRAGICAL OCCURRENCE AT

NORTHFLEET.

ADJOURNED INQUEST—VERDICT OF WILFUL
MURDER AGAINST WILLIAM FARMER.
Yesterday morning, at 11 o'clock, Joseph Charles
Carttar, Esq., the Coroner for kent, and the Jury
reassembled at Wombwell Hall, Northfleet, the re-
sidence of Thomas Harman, Esq., pursuant to ad-
journment, touching the death of Sarah Parker, a
housemaid in the service of the above-named gentle-
man, who was shot through the heart by William
Farmer, a coachman residing in the same establish-
ment, who afterwards cut his own throat in a dan-
gerous and frightful manner.
Mr. John Mathews, solicitor, residing at Graves-
end, attended on behalf of William Farmer.
The Coroner read over the evidence of the wit-
nesses examined on Wednesday last, in order that
they might have an opportunity of correcting any
errors, or supplying any additional facts. They un-
derwent a cross-examination by Mr. Mathews, but
nothing material was elicited in addition to the evi-
evidence which was given on Thursday last. On
the Coroner's arriving at the evidence of Mr.
Russell, the surgeon, that gentleman wished to cor-
rect that part which stated that the gun was pointed
at the deceased, and has inserted instead that the
gun appeared to have been pointed towards Sarah
Parker. This was accordingly done, and Mr. Ma-
thews observed that it was a material distinction.
Mr. Mathews then said that he understood Mr.
Russell to say that very little blood flowed exter-
nally from the deceased ?
Mr. Russell replied in the affirmative.
Mr. Mathews inquired whether that would have
been the case, if the gun had gone off in a slanting
or rising direction.
Mr. Russell said that he considered the shot en-
tered the deceased in an oblique direction, in an
ascending line, but in so slight a manner as scarcely
to be perceptible. Less blood would flow in conse-
quence than if the shot had entered in a direct line.
The CORONER having inquired if there was any
further evidence, and being answered in the negative.
Mr. Mathews observed, that he would call only one
witness on behalf of the unfortunate roan. He then
called Mr. Harman, who gave evidence as follows :
—On Monday the 21st of January, at ten o'clock
in the morning, Farmer asked his permission to be
allowed to shoot on his premises; witness observed
that he might go out for half an hour morning and
evening down the " Spring," to shoot wild duck,
but on no account to neglect his employment. The
family that afternoon had been to Gravesend, and
at two o'clock Farmer returned with the carriage.
Farmer ate a very hearty dinner, and then took up
the gun and flashed it off,
for the purpose, as he said,
of trying it before he went out shooting. It is
my firm opinion the death of the housemaid was
purely accidental. There were many circumstances
to lead him to form such an opinion. If the man in-
tended to have committed such a horrid act, he
would not have chosen the kitchen for the perpe-
tration of the crime, where seven or eight persons
were almost constantly in attendance. It was evi-
dent he neither carried a knife or razor with him to
commit suicide, but immediately he discovered the
gun was loaded, he seized a knife from the tray, and
in despair attempted to destroy himself. He
(witness) was no advocate for guilt, more especially
when a fellow-creature had lost his life, but he
should not be doing his duty were he not to state
that it was his decided opinion the occurrence was
one of accident. Farmer was an excellent servant,
and, iA fact, so were all connected with his esta-
blishment.
Mr. Mathews hoped that he should not be ex-
ceeding the privilege granted him by the Coroner,
in questioning the witnesses, by saying a few words
on behalf of his unfortunate client. He was far
from wishing that a full investigation into all the
circumstances should not take place. His client also
was anxious that his conduct should be thoroughly
investigated. Many rumours were afloat to the
prejudice of the unfortunate man, but he (Mr.
Mathews) considered that the occurrence was purely
accidental, and with this view of it, he would ask,
in the event of the Jury sending the case to the
assizes, as had been stated it was their intention of
doing, what was Farmer to be sent there fur ? He
was willing that justice should be done to all parties,