14448. Adulteration   and   misbranding   of   ground   beef   scraps   and   meat
scraps.    IT.  S. v.  Norfolk Tallow  Co.     Plea  of guilty.    Fine,  SIOO.
(F. &T>. No. 19630.    I. S. Nos. 15235-v, 16651-v, 16687-v.)
On September 24, 1925, the United States attorney for the Eastern District 
of Virginia, 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 Norfolk Tallow Co., a corporation, Norfolk, Va., alleging shipment by said 
company, in violation of the food and drugs act as amended, on or about 
February 16, 1924, from the State of Virginia into the State of Maryland, of 
a quantity of ground beef scraps, and on or about May 15 and 27, 1924, from 
the State of Virginia into the States of South Carolina and Florida, respec- 
tively, of quantities of meat scraps, all of which were adulterated and mis- 
branded. The articles were labeled, variously, in part: (Bag) " Square Deal 
Ground Beef Scraps * * * Guaranteed Analysis Protein 55 to 65% 
?*    *    *    Fiber 1 to 2%."   (tag)   " 100 Lbs. Net Notalco Extra Quality  Meat
Scraps * * * Guaranteed Analysis Protein Min. 55% * * *~'Manu- 
factured by Norfolk Tallow Co. Norfolk, Va.," and (bag) "Notalco High AA 
?Grade Meat Scraps "* * * Guaranteed Analysis Protein Min. 45% * .;.*.-.-r:*. 
Manufactured by Norfolk Tallow Co., Norfolk, Va." 
i;i   ^u;>fS%
Analysis by the Bureau of Chemistry of this, department of a sample of the 
beef scraps showed that it contained 52.5 per cent protein aDd 2.39 per cent 
crude fiber; analysis of a sample of the Extra Quality meat scraps and of the 
High AA Grade meat scraps showed that they contained 57.88 per cent and 
41.55 per cent, respectively, of protein. 
Adulteration of the articles was alleged in the information for the reason 
that a product containing less protein than declared on the labels, and also 
containing, in respect to the so-called ground beef scraps, more fiber than 
declared, had been mixed and packed with the said articles so as to reduce 
and lower and injuriously affect their quality and strength and had been 
substituted for the said articles.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, to wit, "Guar- 
anteed Analysis Protein 55 to 65% Fiber 1 to 2%," " 100 Lbs. Net *' * * ' 
Extra Quality Meat Scraps * * * Guaranteed Analysis Protein Min. 55%," 
and " High AA Grade Meat Scraps * * * Guaranteed Analysis Protein Min. 
45%." borne on the respective labels of the articles, were false and misleading, 
in that the said statements represented that the articles contained not less 
than 55 per cent of protein, or not less than 45 per cent of protein, as the case 
might be, that the so-called ground beef scraps contained not more than 2 per 
-cent of fiber, and that the bags containing the meat scraps shipped May 15, 
1924, into South Carolina, contained 100 pounds thereof, and for the further 
reason that the articles were labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead 
the purchaser into the belief that they were as above represented, whereas 
the articles contained less protein than declared on the respective labels, the 
said ground beef scraps contained more than 2 per cent of fiber, and the bags 
containing the said shipment into South Carolina contained less than 100 
-pounds of meat scraps. Misbranding was alleged with respect to the said ship- 
ment into South Carolina 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 outside of the package, in that the actual contents of the bag 
was less than represented.
On November 2, 1925, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on 
behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $100.
W. M. JARDINB, Secretary of Agriculture.