NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 2344.
(Given pursuant to section  4 of the Food and Drugs Act.)
ADULTERATION AND MISBRANDING OF NUTMEG EXTRACT.
On November 16, 1912, the United States Attorney for the South- 
ern District of Ohio,.acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agri- 
culture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said 
district an information against Emil I. Mayer, trading and doing 
business under and by the name of the Cincinnati Extract Works, 
Cincinnati, Ohio, alleging shipment by him, in violation of the Food 
and Drugs Act, on February 6, 1912, from the State of Ohio into 
the State of Tennessee of a quantity of so-called nutmeg extract 
which was adulterated and misbranded. The product was labeled: 
" Nutmeg Extract Artificially Colored Cincinnati Extract Works, 
Cincinnati, Ohio."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry 
of this Department showed the following results: Specific gravity, 
20/4° C., 0.9118; ethyl alcohol (per cent by volume), 57.4; methyl 
alcohol, absent; solids (per cent by weight), 0.06; coloring matter, 
inappreciable amount dry color behaves similar to Ponceau 3R; oil 
by precipitation (per cent by volume), 1.2.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the information for 
the reason that another substance, to wit, a dilute extract of nutmeg, 
had been mixed and packed as, for, and with the product, purporting 
to be genuine nutmeg extract so as to reduce, lower, and injuriously 
affect its quality and strength, and further in that a substance, to wit, 
a dilute extract of nutmeg, had been substituted for genuine full- 
strength nutmeg extract which the product by its label purported to 
be. Adulteration was alleged for the further reason that the prod- 
uct was colored artificially and in a manner whereby its inferiority 
was concealed.
77868°—No. 2244—13
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the label and brand 
on the product bore a statement regarding it and the ingredients and 
substances contained therein which said statement, " Nutmeg Ex- 
tract," was false, misleading, and deceptive in that it purported and 
represented the product to be full-strength nutmeg extract, conform- 
ing to the standard therefor, that is to say, containing not less than 
2 per cent by volume of the oil of nutmeg, whereas, in truth and in 
fact, it was not such genuine full-strength nutmeg extract, but was 
a dilute nutmeg extract, containing only 1.2 per cent of the oil of 
nutmeg. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the 
product was labeled and branded so as to deceive and mislead the 
purchaser thereof, in that the label was calculated to convey the 
impression and create the belief that the product was full-strength 
nutmeg extract, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not so, but was 
a dilute nutmeg extract, artificially colored and deficient in the 
percentage of the oil of nutmeg.
On November 16, 1912, defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere 
to the information and the court imposed a fine of $25, with costs of 
$13.45.
W. M. HAYS, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, January $3, 1913.
2244
o