Murder Trial 1815

Interesting Murder Trial

The Weekly Entertainer April 24, 1815 at 334-336

Old Bailey, April 8.

Love and Murder at Lisbon.

On Friday William Sawyer was indicted for the wilful murder of Harriet Gaskets, at Lisbon, by shooting her through the head on the 17th of April, 1814.

The prisoner was a young man in the commissariat department of the British army, and the circumstances were of a most singular nature. The deceased went out to Portugal in the month of February 1814, and lived with an officer in the same department as the prisoner. The latter was also a resident at their house at Campo Major, near Lisbon. An attachment grew up between the deceased and the prisoner which was the cause of jealousy to his brother officer. On the 17th of April they met at dinner with two or three other officers. Harriet and the prisoner appeared much dejected and ate no dinner. The prisoner particularly appeared in a state of great mental dejection. Towards the evening, he and the deceased walked together in the garden, and the report of three pistols was heard. On going into the garden the prisoner and the deceased were both lying on the ground. Harriet Gaskett was quite dead, but the prisoner was not. He was removed into the house, and soon recovered strength; he then cut his throat, but not fatally. The next day his brother officers met, and reduced into writing the statement of the facts, and it was read to the prisoner, who signed it. They collected the facts from reports in the neighbourhood, and from what they understood to have passed. They said the prisoner appeared calm and collected, and understood what was read to him, except one witness, who said, it appeared to him that the prisoner was wholly indifferent to life and he believed he would have signed any thing which had been presented to him. The written statements were then read, in which the prisoner acknowledged he had a criminal intercourse with Harriet Gaskett; that she had promised to live with him, but that her former protector discovering this arrangement, he made her promise not to live with him, but she added she would die with him. That having made up their minds to die together, they went into the garden, when she drank half a bottle of laudanum, and he took the remainder; that he then at her request shot her through the head, and discharged two other pistols against his own; and that these not succeeding he afterwards cut his throat. This was the substance of the evidence against him. Being called upon for his defence he put in a written paper as follows:

My Lord.--The severe wound in my throat renders me incapable of distinctly articulating; I have therefore reduced to writing the very few observations with which I shall trouble the court on this melancholy business. No one could feel a more sincere regard for another than I did for the unfortunate young woman whose death occasions this enquiry; and I solemnly declare that never for a moment did I meditate the slightest injury against her. I have but a very confused recollection of this unhappy event, and therefore abstain from entering into any detail of occurrences; I can only assure your lordship that nothing is impressed on my memory except the determined resolution expressed by the deceased to commit suicide and her earnest entreaties for me to follow her example; but the mental derangement under which I laboured, entirely precludes me from stating in what manner it was perpetrated. Since my convalescence, I have learnt from my friends that almost immediately after the unhappy affair, some admissions were obtained from me; of these I have not the slightest remembrance; but as I was then most anxious to be relieved from my sufferings, I probably said any thing likely to accelerate my dissolution or avoid importunity. I very much regret the absence of Mr. Rickford; he would be a very important witness on my behalf, as he alone is acquainted with all the circumstances related to this transaction, and well knows the determination of the deceased to destroy herself. The gentlemen who conduct the prosecution being aware that the evidence of this person was likely to be material to my defence, have very kindly done every thing in their power to obtain his attendance, but I understand their applications to bring him forward have been unsuccessful. I will not trespass further on your lordship’s indulgence, but trust my case to the merciful consideration of your lordship and the gentlemen of the jury.

A great number of officers, some of high rank, spoke most highly of him, as a good tempered and humane young man.

The learned judge, having recapitulated the evidence, the jury retired for nearly two hours, and then returned with a verdict of guilty; but strongly recommended him to mercy, as there was no evidence of malice present.

The verdict being received, the counsel for the prisoner moved, in arrest of judgment, that the court had no jurisdiction over the offence, being committed within an independent kingdom, not subject to Great Britain.

Lord Ellenborough admitted of this objection, but desired them to look at the indictment to see if they found any further objection. In looking through, two other objections were urged, that it did not conclude “against the form of the statute,” and also “it was not averred that the parties were British subjects.” Judgement was respited in order to have these points of law argued at next term.