The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-04-01
NEW TRIAL OF AN OLD CASE.
A Damage Suit Which Has Passed
Through All Processes of Litigation,
And Still Is No Nearer an End Than in
the Beginning-The Celebrated Tay-
lor-Rice Case Reopened.

The suit Of DR.. Henry w. Taylor, homeo
pathic physician residing in Illinois, against
Dr. Harrison ]. Rice, an old allopathic practi
toner of Rockville, for damages on account of
alleged malicious prosecution, which has passed
through nearly all phases of the ups and downs
of litigation, and has been in the courts for
years. is now no nearer an end than it
was in the beginning Judge Woods having
rendered a decision in the United States Court
yesterday which reopens the case.
The suit arose from an active interest which
DR.. Rice took in procuring testimony upon which
Taylor was indicted in Parke county on the charge
Of criminal practice, but of which he was ac-
Quilted when tried before jury In his COM
plant demanding damages Taylor assumed the
burden Of showing that Rice went before the
grand jury and malciously testified falsely, and
procured others to testify that he had been gull
ty Of criminal practice, resulting in the death Of
the patient and child. When the case came ND
in the federal court few months ago, after
having been transferred from the Circuit Courts,
the trial occupied over three weeks, and resulted
finally in the jury returning verdict giving the
plaintiff Judgment for damages to the amount of
$4,000. The attorneys for Rice entered mo-
ton for new trial, and the argument on this
has occupied, at different times, several days.
In his decision which was rendered yesterday,
Judge Woods holds that 'there is a clear lack of
Tor, in his complaint against Rice, assumes the
burden of proving. Indeed" the Judge says
"if strict construction of the complaint had
been insisted upon at the trial. the court would
probably have deemed it proper to direct
verdict for the defendant: but the case
I'M N
coded theory that the complaint contained a
separate charge against the defendant of wrong
full assistance to the prosecution, rendered after
the indictment had been found it was deemed
proper to submit that issue, and the others with
it. to the consideration Of the jury" The court
agrees with the counsel of the defendant that
this charge was not well laid, because it is not
shown that the alleged assistance was rendered
maliciously and without probable cause. The
judge states that II there were no other objec-
tions to the verdict, he would be inclined to
hold the defendant estopped to make this one;
but, limiting the case, as he thinks it should
be, to this charge Of assistance at the trial, he
feels constrained to declare the damages excess
i've. That the verdict was not the result of
dispasslOnate consideration of the evidence,
seems to the court altogether probable-especial-
ly i'll the light of some of the arguments and ap-
peals made to the jury. more particularly
the denunciation OF the defendant on ac-
count of the alleged dissertation of the
grave of the deceased woman, opened for the pur-
pose of the official postmortem examination.
Other considerations equally irrelevant to the
rights Of the litigants, were woven into multi
farious appeals of such eloquence and force as to
leave little room for wonder at the result
The Judge gives as further reason for his be-
lief that the verdict is not right the opinion that
the defendant had reasonable cause to believe
the plaintiff guilty of the crime for which he
was indicted. 1t may be that DIR. Rice knew
or had heard of other facts, circumstances or
statements than those brought out in the trial,
but, if so. not of such significance as to change
the nature of the case as outlined. While these
facts and circumstances fall short of showing
beyond a reasonable doubt case of criminal
abortion they are such as to evoke the greatest
enough to justify any good citizen, if he chose
to do it, in moving the grand jury to an investi
cation, and an indictment having been returned
by that body, to warrant him in giving assist
ance to the prosecution For these reasons he
thinks that the defendant is entitled to the new
trial asked.