By EVANGELINE 3 Mock Trial Tuesday Night. The large crowd who attended the Mock Trial at the opera house on Tuesday night seemed to get a good deal of fun out of the perfor mance. The case was the suit of Mrs. Jarusha Rugg Perkins against Mr. Howard Jerger for breach of prom ise. Several cases on the docket were read out before reaching this, but were continued for various causes. The part of the plaintiff in the breach of promise case was taken by Miss Katherine Cleveland and that of her niece by Miss Girdner. The officers of the court were Judge, 5S. A. Roddenberg; Sheriff, TS. Singletary; Clerk, Oscar Groover; Court Crier, H. S. Poole. The jurors answered to the names of Chauncey Depew, John Sulli van, J. Pierpont Morgan, John D. Rockerfeller, Hoke Smith, Joe Brown, Admiral Dewey, Theodore Roosevelt, Benjamin Hill and Ben Tillman. William H. Taft and William J. Bryan were also sum moned, but the former had a press ing business engagement that he could not leave and the latter not left. In private life these jurors pass under the now de plumes of W. A. Pringle, C. C. Cocroft, Tee Neel, Perry Strickland, Tom Ball, Clyde Neel, Cicero Thompson, Charlie Smith, Charlie Acasta and Jr. A. Purner. The witnesses for the plaintiff were Miss Rena Bou chelle and Mr. W. A. Watt. ‘Ihose for the defendant were Dr. Harry Ainsworth, Mr. Heath Varnadoe, Dr. Tittle and Miss Girdner. Col. Newton was counsel for the plaint iff and Messrs. W. S. McIntyre and Roscoe Luke represented the de fendant. Mrs. Perkins, the fair plaintiff, had a sad, subdued air, befitting the state of her wounded affections. She said she was a sad widow and kept a boarding house on Broad street. The defendant, who was tall and fair, with curly blonde hair and baby blue eyes, did not look as if he could be guilty of the charge brought against him, but it was said to be one of those cases where appearances are deceptive and it was asserted that he had been mix ed up in several such affairs before, but had never been brought to jus tice. The plaintiff first took the stand. She said that the defendant had made love to her at any time and all times, and had also eaten her hash. He had written her numer ous love letters and had sent her poetry composed by Capt. Friplett and Jesse Ward,Jr., and yet in spite of all this he had deserted her and tried to marry her niece because she had fallen heir to a legacy of $2,000, which he wanted to use in improving the Times Enterprise. At one time during her evidence when alluding to certain tender passages between them, the de fendant fainted and was only re stored by a liberal supply of lacteal fluid imbibed from a bottle which his counsel had brought along, fearing the effects of so much ex citement upon him. Miss Rena Bouchelle and Mr. Will Watt testified that they had seen the defendant making love to the widow at all hours, and had also seen him eating her hash, and anything else he could find. Miss Bouchelle said he had made love to her and had given her a ring, which she afterward found cost twenty-five cents. The defendant then testified in his own behalf. He admitted making love to the widow, but said it was to give him a chance to see the niece. He wanted a wife, but wanted one like a sunflower who would shut up at night. It was presumed that was the time he liked to spread around himself. Miss Girdner said that the de fendant had made love to her, send ing her notes in packages from Pringle’s grocery store, while she was doing the cooking for the wid ow. Mr. Heeth Varnedee was a wit ness for the defense, but his evi dence was very much mixed up with a dog fight at the Smith-Har ley Shoe Company, at which some of the officers of the court were back door spectators, and the audience concluded it was dog-gone hard to tell what he was driving at. Drs. Ainsworth and Little ap peared as experts on diseases of the brain and discoursed learnedly on motomania, dipsomania and klep tomania, any and all of which it was decided both parties might have. The audince were glad to find at the end of their testimony that they knew as much as they had before these witnesses testified. It seemed to be the general idea,ow ever, that the plaintiff must have some affection of the brain or she would not have fallen so much in love with the defendant, and the consensus of opinion was that the defendant was not exactly right in the upper story, as no man could sit up every night in the week and make love to two women and then write the brilliant articles in the Times Enterprise without becom ing mentally unbalanced. After the testimony was all in Mr. Luke made the speech for the defense. His argument was based chiefly on the fact that the defend ant was excusable for trying to get the girl with the $2,000 as he could use it to such good advantage in getting his hair cut and in improv ing the Times Enterprise, which everybody knew badly needed it. Col. Newton then made the clos ing argument for the prosecution, which was a fine one. Judge Roddenberg's charge to the jury was a very clear and ex haustive one. He said it was his duty to explain the law to them, he did not expect them to under stand it and had no idea that they could, as they didn’t have brain enough, but he was determined to do his duty and explain it. When he had finished those of the jury who had been asleep were waked up and they went out to consult on a verdict. They returned after a short time looking much refreshed, probably near-beer from Mr. Camp bell’s stand. The verdict as an nounced by foreman Chauncey De pew, was that the jury ‘‘found no ground of action.’ ’ This closed the celebrated breach of promise case. The widow lost both her case and her lover, but the general idea seemed to be that she did not lose much. The Judge ordered that the defendant be tried for lu nacy at an early date.