19254. Adulteration and Misbranding of meat  scraps and digester tank¬
age.    U. S. v. Packer Products Co.     Pleas  of guilty.     Fines, $560.
(F. & D. Nos. 22545, 23729. I. S. Nos. 9365-X, 9366-X, 9367-X, 9368-X, 
9370-X, 9371-X, 9373-X, 9374-X, 11964-X, 15661-X, 012901, 012903, 012904, 
012905.)
These actions involved various shipments of stock feed under the trade 
names of Honeymeade meat scraps, and Porker digester tankage. All ship- 
ments of the meat scraps were low in protein, i. e., containing less protein than 
labeled, and in certain shipments hoof meal and bone meal were found to be 
present in the article. The digester tankage was found to contain hoof meal, 
ground leather, or cocoa shells, one or more of these substances being present 
in all but one of the shipments; 3 of the 10 consignments of tankage were also 
found low in protein.
On April 17, 1929, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis- 
trict Court of the United States for the district aforesaid an information 
against the Packer Products Co., a corporation, Chicago, Ill. On September 12, 
1920, a second information was filed against the said defendant. Both informa- 
tions charged the defendant company with shipping in interstate commerce 
from Illinois into the States of Indiana and Ohio, in violation of the food and 
drugs act, on various dates between October 23, 1926 and July 27, 1928, quanti- 
ties of meat scrap and digester tankage that were misbranded, and the greater 
portion of which were also adulterated. The articles were labeled in part: 
" Porker Digester Tankage " or " Honeymeade Meat Scraps." The labels of the 
articles bore further statements, the material portions of which are hereinafter 
quoted.
Adulteration was alleged with respect to portions of the said meat scraps 
for the reason that substances, hoof meal and bone meal, had been substituted 
in part for meat scraps; in that hoof meal and bone meal had been mixed and 
packed with the said meat scraps so as to reduce and lower and injuriously 
affect its quality and strength; and in that hoof and bone meal had been mixed 
with the article in a manner whereby its damage and inferiority were con- 
cealed. Adulteration was alleged with respect to portions of the digester 
tankage for the reason that substances, namely, hoof meal in one lot, ground 
leather scraps in certain lots, ground leather scraps and hoof meal in certain 
lots, and cocoa shells in certain lots, had been substituted for the said article; 
and in that one or more of said substances had been mixed and packed with 
the article so as to lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality and 
strength. Adulteration was alleged with respect to one lot of the said tankage 
for the further reason that hoof meal had been mixed with the article in a 
manner whereby damage and inferiority were concealed.
Misbranding was charged against all shipments of the articles for the 
reason that certain statements appearing on the tags attached to the bags 
containing the articles were false and misleading in that the said statements
represented that the articles were composed solely of the ingredients stated 
on the labels, and that they contained the amount of protein and fat declared, 
and for the further reason that they were labeled so as to deceive and mislead 
the purchaser into the belief that they were composed solely of the ingredients 
stated on the labels and that they contained the amount of protein and fat 
declared; whereas the various lots of the articles failed to conform to the 
labels in the following respects: Portions of the said meat scraps were labeled 
"Packer Products Company, of Chicago, Ill., Guarantees this Honeymeade 
Meat Scraps to contain not less than   *    *    *    50.0 per cent of crude protein
* * * and to be compounded from the following ingredients: Meat and 
Bone Residue," whereas the article contained less than 50 per cent of crude 
protein and was compounded in part of hoof meal and bone meal; a portion 
of the said meat scraps was labeled, "50% Protein Meat Scraps Guaranteed 
Analysis * * * Protein—50%," whereas it contained less than 50 per cent 
of protein; a portion of the said digester tankage was labeled, " Packer Prod- 
ucts Company, of Chicago, Ill., Guarantees this Porker Brand 60% Protein 
Digester Tankage to contain not less than * * * 60.0 Per cent of crude 
protein * * * and to be compounded from the following ingredients: 
Meat and Bone Residue," whereas the article contained less than 60 per cent 
of crude protein, and was compounded in part of hoof meal; a portion of the 
said tankage was labeled, "60% Digester Tankage, Crude Fat 6% Crude 
Protein 60% * * * Ingredients Meat and Bone Residue," whereas it con- 
tained less than 60 per cent of crude protein, less than 6 per cent of crude 
fat and was composed in part of hoof meal and cocoa shells; portions of the 
tankage were labeled, " Digester Tankage * * * Ingredients Meat & Bone 
Residue," whereas they were composed in part of other substances, namely, 
ground leather scraps, cocoa shells or ground leather scraps and hoof meal; 
portions were labeled, " Packer Products Company, * * * Guarantees 
this * * * Digester Tankage * * * to be compounded from the fol- 
lowing ingredients: Meat and Bone Residue," whereas it was composed in 
part of ground leather scraps, and a portion of the said tankage was labeled, 
"60% Digester Tankage Guaranteed Analysis   *    *    *   Crude Protein 60%
* * * Ingredients Meat & Bone Residue," whereas it contained less than 
60 per cent of crude protein, and was composed in part of ground leather 
scraps.
On March 8, 1932, a plea of guilty to each information was entered on behalf 
of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $36(0 in one case 
and $200 in the other.
ARTHUR M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.