The Lake County times. [volume] (Hammond, Ind.) 1906-1933, 1909-09-09

him to appear and stand trial after
which he was acquitted
2. This prosecution is now wholly
completed and by reason Of It the plan
tin has been brought into infamy and
disgrace, suffered loss of time, has
been damaged in business and has been
put to great expense in defending him
self and for this reason has been dam
aged TO the extent of $4,000.
Paragraph two is the most sensa-
tional of all. It makes the charge of
conspiracy and points to the alleged
fact that the insurance on David John
sons place, which was held by a com
pany that Knots represented. was can
celed the day before the fire for fear
that the flames might get beyond con-
troll
l. Alexander Rodman alleges that
the defendants. Knots. Johnson Null
cahey and Martin conspired and con-
federated together to institute a Grim
inal prosecution against the plaintiff
and compelled him to answer to the
charge Of arson, involving the start
ing of a fire under the back steps of
the business and dwelling house of
David Johnson in Gary.
SAY THAT THEY KNEW 1T.
It is alleged that the defendants
knew that Rodman was not about the
premises of David johnson at the time
the fire started. but that he was at
home. having ascertained this fact i'm
mediately before the fire was STARTED
by means of John Mulcahey, who Wis
tied the plaintiffs house.
8. The defendants desired to know
the facts regarding the presence Of
Rodman at his own home for fear that
! he would be at such a distance from
| home at the time that it would be
physically impossible for him to be at
| the place where the fire was started
and thus establish an tncontrovertable
alibi and defense and thus defeat their
intentions to involve him in the crime.
| PLAIN CHARGE OF ARSON.
| 4. The plaintiff charges that the fire
was started with the intent and pur-
pose of charging him with attempted
arson, proof of which Is shown by the
fact that the fire started Immediately
after officer MuIcahey was at the plan
tifrs home.
| 5. That the building had been, for
| a long time before that, insured for a
large amount, which insurance on the
| day before the fire was started. can
celed by, and at the direction of said
Thomas E. Knots, who was one of
the firm of agents who insured the
| building, and was Cancelled for the pur-
pose of preventing any liability in case
the fire became uncomfortable and the
building was destroyed, which David
Johnson. Thomas f. Knots, John Null
cahey and Joseph Martin did not in
tend should occur.
WHAT DID THEY INTEND.
6. The plaintiff states that Knots,
Johnson. eft al, did not intend to prose-
| cute and convict Rodman of the charge
of attempted arson, but it was their
intention before starting the fire to
disgrace him. scare him and drive him
away from the town of Gary because
Rodman, with the assistance Of others
in the town, was engaged in UNFOLDING
the law, prosecuting gambling and
! bawdy house keepers, among whom
was the defendant David Johnson.
T. That johnson was under the pro-
lection of Thomas z. Knots. presi-
| dent of the town board of Gary, and
the marshal and his dputies. who were
under the direction of the president
whose desire 1t was to let such unlaw-
full places run in open and notorious
violation of the law
Claiming damage for the above rea-
sons, Alexander Rodman asks for an
additional $40, 900 damages.