21018. Adulteration and Misbranding of nutter.    V. S. v. Perry Bros.    Plea
of guilty.    Fine, $5 and costs.     (F. & D. no. 29433.    I. S. no. 23283.)
This case was based on an interstate shipment of butter, samples of which 
were found to contain less than 80 percent by weight of milk fat, the standard 
for butter established by Congress, and which was also short weight. The 
label failed to bear a plain and conspicuous statement of the quantity of the 
contents, as required by law, since the statement made was incorrect.
On April 10, 1933, the United States attorney for the Western District of 
Washington, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
district court an information against Perry Bros., a corporation, Seattle, Wash., 
alleging shipment by said company in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as 
amended, on or about April 5, 1932, from the State of Washington to Alaska, of 
a quantity of butter which was adulterated and misbranded. The article was 
labeled in part: " Perry's Best Butter Cream Quality One Pound Net Packed 
by Perry Bros. Seattle."
It was alleged in the information that the article was adulterated in that a 
product containing less than 80 percent by weight of milk fat had been substi- 
tuted for butter, a product which should contain not less than 80 percent of 
milk fat, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, " Butter " and 
" One Pound Net", borne on the label, were false and misleading, and for the 
further reason that the article was labeled so as to deceive and mislead the 
purchaser, since it contained less than 80 percent by weight of milk fat, the 
standard for butter prescribed by law, and the packages contained less than 1 
pound net. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the article 
was food in package form and the quantity of the contents was not plainly 
and conspicuously marked on the outside of the package.
On April 27, 1933, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf 
of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $5 and costs.
M. L. WILSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.