6318. Adulteration and
 misbranding of grape brandy.   IT. S.   *   *   *   v. Russian Monopol?
Co., a corporation.   Plea of guilty.   Fine, S50.   (F. & T>. No. 8172.   I. S. No. 4637-1.)
On March 2, 1918, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of New York,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the?
United States for said district an information against the Russian Monopol Co., a?
corporation, Brooklyn, N. Y., alleging shipment by said company, in violation of?
the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, on or about March 10, 1916, from the State of?
New York, into the State of Maryland, of a quantity of an article labeled in part,?
"Grape Brandy," which was adulterated and misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department?
showed the following results, expressed as parts per 100,000 of 100 degrees proof?
alcohol unless otherwise stated:
Net contents (fluid ounces)?
 24. 7
Specific gravity 15.6?/15.6?C?
9-174
Alcohol (per cent by volume)?
 43. 4
Extract (gram per 100 cc)?
Ash (gram per 100 cc)?
Acidity, calculated as acetic?
 30. 4
Esters, calculated as ethyl acetate?
 17
Fusel oil, calculated as amyl alcohol?
 39
Aldehydes, calculated as acetaldehyde?
    2. 3
This product  is composed of   neutral spirits and  brandy.    The?
quantity of contents is not stated upon the label.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason that a?
certain substance, to wit, neutral spirits, had been substituted in part for brandy,?
?which the article purported to be.
Misbranding .of the article was alleged for the reason that the statement concerning?
the article and the ingredients and substances contained therein, to wit, grape?
brandy, appearing on the label, was false and misleading in that it represented to?
the purchaser that the article was grape brandy; and for the further reason that it?
was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief?
that it was grape brandy, when, in truth and in fact, it was not, but was a mixture of?
brandy and neutral spirits. Misbranding of the article was alleged for the further?
reason that although it was in package form, the quantity of the contents of the pack??
age was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside thereof in terms of?
weight, measure, or numerical count.
On March 16, 1918, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the informa??
tion, and the court imposed a fine of $50.
C. F. MARVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
N.J. 6301-6350.]   SERVICE  AND BEGULATORY  ANNOUNCEMENTS.	401