F. & D. No. 3404.
I. S. No. 10002-d.	
Issued March 27, 1913.
United States Department of Agriculture,
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY.
NOTICE OF JUDGMENT NO. 2060.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Food and Drugs Act.)
ADULTERATION AND MISBRANDING OF BLACKBERRY CORDIAL.
On August 1, 1912, the United States Attorney for the District?
of Columbia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture,?
filed in the Police Court of the said District of Columbia an informa??
tion against Frances Hollander, late of the District aforesaid, alleg??
ing that said defendant, on July 6, 1911, at the District aforesaid,?
sold, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, a quantity of black??
berry cordial which was adulterated and misbranded. The product?
was labeled: " B. B. Flavor?Choice Old Blackberry Cordial. Bot??
tled by F. Hollander, 517 9th St., N. W., Washington, D. C."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry?
of this Department showed the following results:
Specific gravity at 15.66?  CL_?
? 1.13321
Alcohol  (per cent by volume)?,?
    8.82
Solids (percent) by specific gravity (Brix table)?
38.01
Reducing sugars, direct (grams per 100 cc)?
 23. 52
Reducing sugars, invert (grams per 100 cc)?
31.62
Sucrose, by copper  (grams per 100 cc)?
    2.95
Non-sugar solids (grams per 100 cc)__?
    6.54
Polarization, invert, 87?  C?
?V__ 13.5
Glucose (grams per 100 cc)?
    8.3
Total acid as acetic (grams per 100 cc)_?
     . 65
Volatile acid as acetic   (grams per 100 cc)?
      .18
Ash (grams per 100 cc)?
      .51
Water-insoluble ash (grams per 100 cc)?
      .09
Alkalinity of water-soluble ash (grams per 100 cc)?___ 27.8
Water soluble P2 Os?
       Trace
Water insoluble P2 05 (mg. per 100 cc)?_?_?20.3-
Chlorin as 01.  (grams per 100 cc)?
     .159
Coal-tar color?
       Ponceau 3R
71290??No, 2060?13
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the information for?
the reason that starch sugar and artificial coloring matter had been?
mixed and packed with the product in such a manner as to reduce,?
lower, and injuriously affect its quality and strength. Adulteration?
was alleged for the further reason that an imitation blackberry?
cordial containing starch sugar and artificial coloring matter had?
been substituted in whole or in part for the genuine article, to wit,?
blackberry cordial. Misbranding was alleged for the reason that?
the product was labeled as set forth above, which statement was?
false and misleading, and the product was labeled so as to deceive?
and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it was genuine black??
berry cordial, whereas in truth and in fact it was an imitation?
blackberry cordial.
On August 1, 1912, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to the?
information and the court imposed a fine of $20.
W. M. HATS,?
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, December 4-, 1912.
2060