(N. J. 75.)
ADULTERATED AND MISBRANDED PEPPER.
(AS TO PRESENCE OP NUTSHELLS, FRUIT PITS, ETC.)
In accordance with the provisions of section 4 of the Food and 
Drugs Act of June 30, 1906, and of regulation 6 of the rules and regu- 
lations for the enforcement of the act, notice is given that on the 3d 
day of February, 1909, in the district court of the United States for 
the eastern district of Washington, in a prosecution by the United 
States against the Powell-Sanders Company, a corporation doing 
business at Spokane, Wash., for violation of section 2 of the aforesaid 
act in the shipment and delivery for shipment from Washington to 
Idaho of a product labeled " Le Roi Black Pepper, Powell-Sanders 
Company, Spokane, Washington," which was adulterated and mis- 
branded in that it contained cracker crumbs, ground nutshells, and 
fruit pits, and was not black pepper, but a mixture of black pepper 
and said substances, the said defendant having entered a plea of
guilty, the court imposed upon it a fine of $100, and delivered the 
following opinion in connection therewith:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES, FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
WASHINGTON, EASTERN' DIVISION.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
vs.
POWELL-SANDERS COMPANY, A CORPORATION, Defendant.
No. 717.
A. G. AVERY, U. S. Atty.
OPINION.
WHITSON, District Judge:
This is an information filed against the defendant for violation of the act of 
June 30, 1906 (34 Stat. L., 768; Sup. Fed. Stat. Ann., 1907, p. 78), generally 
known as the Pure Food Act. A plea of guilty has been entered, and the only 
question for consideration is the punishment to be inflicted. Upon the state- 
ments made and the data furnished the necessity for the statute is quite ap- 
parent. It seems that the person immediately responsible for the adulterated 
article has been discharged, and it has been stated here that the defendant 
had no knowledge that the law was being violated. The court accepts this as 
true, but it is the duty of a manufacturer engaged in supplying food products 
to know that its managers are not evading the statute, and the presence of 
adulterants in the establishment furnished the opportunity for adulteration. 
The culpability arose through inattention to details. Again, it appears to have 
long been the custom of the trade to engage in this method of swelling profits, 
and the practice has been carried on for so many years and to such an extent 
that no doubt dealers have come to regard the matter in the light of legitimate 
business competition. While these considerations on a plea of guilty palliate, 
they can not excuse. The law is in the interest of public health and must be 
enforced. In view of the circumstances a fine of $100 and costs is considered 
a sufficient reminder of the necessity for a strict compliance with the terms of 
the statute, and this will be the judgment of the court.
On the 6th day of February, 1909, the following judgment was 
entered:
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
WASHINGTON, EASTERN DIVISION.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, 1
vs. 
\ No. 717.
POWELL-SANDERS COMPANY, A CORPORATION, Defendant. J
JUDGMENT.
Now, on this 6th day of February, A. D. 1909, upon motion of the United 
States district attorney for the eastern district of Washington for judgment 
against the defendant in the above-entitled cause, the defendant having hereto- 
fore, to wit, on the 1st day of February, 1909, entered its plea of guilty to the 
information, the court does thereupon adjudge the defendant guilty of the 
offence charged, and upon consideration of the premises, the court being fully 
advised, orders that defendant pay a fine of one hundred dollars ($100.00) 
and the costs of the prosecution; it is, therefore,
Considered, ordered, and adjudged that the plaintiff have and recover of and 
from the defendant the said sum of one hundred dollars ($100.00) as a fine, 
and the costs to be taxed, and that execution issue therefor.
Dated this 6th day of February, A. D. 1909.
EDWARD WHITSON, District Judge.
The facts in the case were as follows:
On June 29, 1907, an inspector of the Department of Agriculture 
purchased, in Coeur Erlene, Idaho, samples of a product labeled 
" Le Roi Black Pepper; Powell-Sanders Company, Spokane, Wash- 
ington." These samples formed part of a shipment made by the 
Powell-Sanders Company, Spokane, Wash., to the Inland Cash Gro- 
cery, of Coeur Erlene, Idaho, on or about June 7, 1907. A sample 
was subjected to analyses in the Bureau of Chemistry, United States 
Department of Agriculture, and found to be adulterated with cracker 
crumbs, ground nutshells, and fruit pits. A trace of red pepper 
tissue was also found in addition to the black pepper tissue.
In the opinion of the Department of Agriculture, black pepper is 
the dried immature berry of Piper nigrum Z., and contains not less 
than six (6) per cent of nonvolatile ether extract, not less than 
twenty-five (25) per cent of starch, not more than seven (7) per cent 
of total ash, not more than two (2) per cent of ash insoluble in 
hydrochloric acid, and not more than fifteen (15) per cent of crude 
fiber. One hundred parts of the nonvolatile ether extract contain 
not less than three and one-quarter (3.25) parts of nitrogen.
It was apparent that the article was both adulterated and mis- 
branded, within the meaning of sections 7 and 8 of the act; adulter- 
ated because cracker crumbs, ground nutshells, and fruit pits had 
been mixed with the pepper, so as to reduce, lower, and injuriously 
affect its quality and strength, and because ground cracker crumbs, 
nutshells, and fruit pits had been substituted wholly or in part for 
said article, and it was misbranded in that it was labeled " black 
pepper " when, as a matter of fact, the analysis showed it consisted 
of black pepper and a mixture of other substances. The Secretary 
of Agriculture having on July 8, 1908, afforded the manufacturers 
an opportunity to show any fault or error in the aforesaid analysis, 
and they having failed to do so, the facts were duly reported to the 
Attorney-General and the case referred to the United States attorney 
for the eastern district of Washington, who filed an information 
against the said Powell-Sanders Company, with the result herein- 
before stated. 
F T   D
GEO. P. MCCABE,
, 
Board of Food and Drug Inspection.
Approved:
JAMES WILSON,
Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, June 16, 1909.