10407. Adulteration and Misbranding of cottonseed meal.   TJ. S.    *     *     *    -r.
Eastern Cotton Oil Co., a Corporation. Plea of guilty. Fine, $30 
and  costs.     (F.  & D. No.   15268.    I.   S.  Nos.  8699-t,  8700-t.)
On November 3, 1921, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of 
North Carolina, 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 Eastern Cotton Oil Co., a corporation, Hertford, N. C, alleging shipment 
by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, on or 
about January 10 and 11, 1921, respectively, from the State of North Carolina 
into the State of Virginia, of quantities of cottonseed meal, part of which was 
misbranded and the remainder of which was adulterated and misbranded. The 
article was labeled in part: (Tag) " Perfection Cotton Seed Meal 100 Lbs. Net 
Manufactured By Eastern Cotton Oil Company, Elizabeth City, N. C.    *    *    *."
Examination of 30 sacks of the product taken from each of the consignments, 
by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department, showed that the average net 
weight of the sacks examined was 98.24 pounds and 97.76 pounds, respectively.
Analysis of a sample taken from the consignment of January 11 by the said 
bureau showed that it contained 39.5 per cent of protein and 11.51 per cent of 
crude fiber.
Adulteration of the article involved in the consignment of January 11 was 
alleged in the information for the reason that a substance low in protein and 
high in crude fiber had been mixed and packed therewith so as to reduce and 
lower and injuriously affect its quality and strength and had been substituted 
in part for cottonseed meal, which the said article purported to be. Adultera- 
tion was alleged for the further reason that a substance low in protein and 
high in crude fiber had been mixed with the article in a manner whereby its 
damage and inferiority were concealed.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to the product involved in the said con- 
signment of January 11 for the reason that the statements, to wit, " * * * 
Cotton Seed Meal 100 Lbs. Net * * * Guarantee Protein not less than 
41.00% Equivalent to Ammonia 8.00% * * * Fibre not more than 10.00%," 
borne on the tags attached to the bags containing the article, regarding the 
article and the substances and ingredients contained in the said bags, and 
regarding the net weight of the article contained in the said bags, were false 
and misleading in that the article did not contain 41 per ce;nt of protein or an 
amount equivalent to 8 per cent of ammonia, but did contain a less amount and 
contained more crude fiber than 10 per cent, and the said bags each contained 
less than 100 pounds net of the article; misbranding was alleged for the further 
reason that the article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the 
purchaser into the belief that it contained not less than 41 per cent of protein 
and not more than 10 per cent of crude fiber and that each of the said bags con- 
tained 100 pounds net of the article, whereas, in truth and in fact, the said 
article contained less than 41 per cent of protein and more than 10 per cent of 
crude fiber, and the said bags each contained less than 100 pounds net of the 
said article. Misbranding was alleged with respect to the product involved in 
both consignments of the article for the 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 packages, since the stated quantity, to wit, " 100 Lbs. Net,"' 
was incorrect and represented more than the actual contents of the package.
On April 12, 1922, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf 
of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $30 and costs.
C. W. PUGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.