S649. Adulteration and misbranding? of cottonseed meal. U. S. '* * *?
v. Searcy Oil & Ice Co., a Corporation. Plea of g-uilty. Fine, $175?
and costs. (F. & D. No. 11052. I. S. Nos. 10689-r, 10690-r, 7005-r, 7522-r,?
7a24-r.)
On May 6, 1920, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Ar??
kansas, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis??
trict Court of the United States for said district an information against the?
Searcy Oil & Ice Co., a corporation, Searcy, Ark., alleging shipment by said?
company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, on or about?
December 23, 1918, from the State of Arkansas into the State of Illinois, of a?
quantity of an article, described in a shipping instruction as " l\?7o ammonia?
cottonseed meal," which was adulterated and misbranded, on or about Decem??
ber 16, 1918, from the State of Arkansas into the State of Illinois, and on or?
about December 12, 1918, from the State of Arkansas into the State of In??
diana, of quantities of Butterfly Brand cottonseed meal, on or about December?
31, 1918, from the State of Arkansas into the State of Iowa, and on or about?
December 21, 1918, from the State of Arkansas into the State of Indiana, of?
quantities of Supreme Brand cottonseed meal which were misbranded.
Analyses of samples of the articles by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed the following results: The "7*? ammonia cottonseed meal"?
contained 7.37 per cent of ammonia. The Indiana shipment of Supreme Brand?
contained 36.6 per cent of protein and 14.79 per cent of crude fiber. The But??
terfly Brand contained 36.2 per cent of protein, 5.77 per cent of fat, and 15.52?
per cent of' crude fiber. The Illinois shipment of Butterfly Brand contained?
37.8 per cent of protein, 5.65 per cent of fat, and 14.8 per cent of crude fiber.?
The Iowa shipment of Supreme Brand contained 36.4 per cent of protein, 5.46?
per cent of fat, and 14.6 per cent of crude fiber.
Adulteration of the article described as "7i? ammonia cottonseed meal"?
was alleged in the information for the reason that a substance, to wit, cotton??
seed meal containing less than 7-J per cent of ammonia, had been substituted in?
wmole or in part for "7.i? ammonia cottonseed meal" which the article pur??
ported to be. Misbranding was alleged in substance for the reason that the?
article was offered for sale and sold under the distinctive name of another?
article, and for the further reason that it was food in package form, and the?
quantity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the out??
side of the package.
Misbranding of the remaining articles was alleged in substance in the infor??
mation for the reason that the following statements, (Butterfly Brand Cotton??
seed Meal) "Protein 38.60 per cent, Fat 6.00 per cent, Crude Fibre 12.00,"?
(Supreme Brand Cottonseed Meal, Iowa shipment) " Not less than 6.00 per cent?
of Crude Fat, 38.6 per cent of Crude Protein, not more than 10.00 per cent of?
Crude Fibre," (Supreme Brand, Indiana shipment) "Protein 38.60? * * *?
Crude Fibre 12?," borne on the tags attached to the sacks containing the arti??
cles, regarding the articles and the ingredients and substances contained therein,?
were false and misleading in that they represented that the articles contained?
not less than 38.60 per cent of protein, not more than 10 per cent, or 12 per cent,?
as the case might be, of crude fiber, and, except in the case of the Indiana ship??
ment of Supreme Brand, 6 per cent of fat, and for the further reason that they?
were labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchasers thereof?
into the belief that they contained not less than 38.60 per cent of protein, not?
more than 10 per cent, or 12 per cent, as the case might be, of crude fiber, and,?
except in the case of the Indiana shipment of Supreme Brand, not less than 6
N. J. 8601-8650]        SERVICE  AND REGULATORY  ANNOUNCEMENTS.	93
per cent of crude fat, whereas, in truth and in fact, the articles did not contain?
38.60 per cent of protein and 6 per cent of fat, but contained a less amount, and?
contained more than 10 per cent, or 12 per cent, as the case might be, of crude?
fiber.
On October 8, 1920, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf?
of the defendant company, and the cqurt imposed a fine :of $175 ,and costs.
E. D,. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.