8652.?Adulteration   and  misbranding   of  gelatin.     TJ.  S.     *      *      *     ~v.  W.  B.
"Wood Mfg. Co., a. Corporation, antl W. B. Wood. Plea of nolo con??
tendere. Fine, $250 and costs. (F. & D. No. 12477. I. S. Nos. 11371-r,?
11400-1.',  12429-r.)
On September 14, 1920, the United States attorney for the Eastern District?
of Missouri, 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 W. B. Wood Mfg. Co., a corporation, and W. B. Wood, St. Louis, Mo.,?
alleging shipment by said defendants, in violation of the Food ancl Drugs Act,?
on or about March 4, 1919, March 25, 1919, and March 16, 1919, from the State of?
Missouri into the States of Ohio and Kentucky, of quantities of gelatin which?
was adulterated and misbranded. The shipment of March 4 was invoiced as?
gelatin.    The remaining shipments were labeled " Gelatine."
Analyses of samples by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department showed?
that the article in each shipment consisted in part of glue and contained exces??
sive quantities of zinc.
Adulteration of the article in all shipments was alleged in the information for?
the reason that it contained an added poisonous and deleterious ingredient,?
to wit, zinc, which might have rendered the article injurious to health, ancl for?
the further reason that glue had been mixed ancl packed with, and substituted?
in part for, gelatin, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding of the article in the shipments of March 16 and 25, 1919, was?
alleged in the information for the reason that the statement, " Gelatine," borne?
on the drum containing the article, regarding it and the ingredients and sub??
stances contained therein, was false and misleading, and the article was labeled?
as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser in that it represented?
that said article was gelatin, whereas, in truth and in fact, said article was?
not gelatin, but was a mixture composed in part of glue. Misbranding was?
alleged for the further reason that the article was a mixture composed in part?
of glue, prepared in imitation of gelatin, ancl was offered for sale and sold?
under the distinctive name of another article, to wit, gelatin.
On November 6, 1920, the defendants entered pleas of nolo contendere to the?
information, whereupon the court imposed a fine of $250 and costs.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.