13925. Adulteration and misbranding of cottonseed cake. TJ. S. v. Rule- 
Javton   Cotton   Oil   Co.     Plea   of   guilty.     Fine,   $25.     (F.   &   D.   No.
19623.     I.  S.  Nos. 22004-v, 22007-V.)
On May 25, 1925, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Texas, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis- 
trict Court of the United States for said district an information against the 
Rule-Jayton Cotton Oil Co., a corporation, Stamford, Tex., alleging shipment 
by said company, under the name of the Stamford Cotton Oil Mill, in two 
consignments, namely, on or about April 8 and June 24, 1924, respectively, 
from the State of Texas into the State of Kansas, of quantities of cottonseed 
cake which was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in 
part: "43% Protein Cottonseed Cake (Prime Quality) Manufactured by Stam- 
ford Cotton Oil Mill Stamford, Texas. Guaranteed Analysis: Crude Protein 
not less than 43.00 Per Cent Crude Fat not less than 6.00 Per Cent * * * 
Crude Fiber not more than 12.00 Per Cent."
Analysis by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department of a sample of 
the article from each shipment showed that it contained 40.44 per cent and 
36.69 per cent, respectively, of protein, and the sample from the shipment of 
April 8 contained 5.9 per cent of crude fat and 14.68 per cent of crude fiber.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that a substance deficient in protein, and in the case of the product consigned 
April 8, 1924, also deficient in fat and containing excessive fiber, had been 
substituted for the said article.
Misbranding was alleged in substance for the reason that the statements, 
" 43% Protein Cottonseed Cake * * * Guaranteed Analysis: Crude Pro- 
tein not less than 43.00 Per Cent," with respect to both consignments, and the 
further statements, " Crude Fat not less than 6.00 Per Cent * * * Crude 
Fiber not more than 12.00 Per Cent," with respect to the consignment of 
April 8, 1924, were false and misleading, in that the said statements repre- 
sented that the article was cottonseed cake containing 43 per cent of protein 
and that the product consigned April 8, 1924, contained not less than 6 per cent 
of fat and not more than 12 per cent of fiber, and for the further reason that 
it was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into 
the belief that it was cottonseed cake containing 43 per cent of protein and 
that the product consigned April 8, 1924, contained not less than 6 per cent 
of fat and not more than 12 per cent of fiber, whereas the said article contained 
less than 43 per cent of protein, and the product consigned April 8, 1924. con- 
tained less than 6 per cent of fat and more than 12 per cent of fiber.
On October 12, 1925, a.plea of guilty to the information was entered on 
behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $25.
R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.