The Sun. — 1833-01-31 (London, England)

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 residence of Thomas Harman, Esq., pursuant to adjournment, touching the death of Sarah Parker, a housemaid in the service of the above-named gentleman, who was shot through the heart by William Farmer, a coachman residing in the same establishment, who afterwards cut his own throat in a dangerous and frightful manner. Mr. John Mathews, solicitor, residing at Gravesend, attended on behalf of William Farmer. The Coroner read over the evidence of the witnesses examined on Wednesday last, in order that they might have an opportunity of correcting any errors, or supplying any additional facts. They underwent a cross-examination by Mr. Mathews, but nothing material was elicited in addition to the evievidence which was given on Thursday last. On the Coroner's arriving at the evidence of Mr. Russell, the surgeon, that gentleman wished to correct 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. Mathews observed that it was a material distinction. Mr. Mathews then said that he understood Mr. Russell to say that very little blood flowed externally 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 entered 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 consequence 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 intended to have committed such a horrid act, he would not have chosen the kitchen for the perpetration of the crime, where seven or eight persons were almost constantly in attendance. It was evident 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 establishment. Mr. Mathews hoped that he should not be exceeding 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,