NOTICE  OF JUDGMENT  NO. 2220.
(Given pursuant to section 4 of the Food and  Drugs Act.)
ADULTERATION  AND  MISBRANDING  OF  VINEGAR.
On August 28, 1912, the United States Attorney for the Southern 
District of Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agricul- 
ture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said district 
an information against the Central City Pickle Co., a corporation, 
Peoria, Ill., alleging shipment by said company, in violation of the 
Food and Drugs Act, on or about July 13, 1911, from the State of 
Illinois into the State of Iowa, of a quantity of vinegar which was 
adulterated and misbranded. The product was labeled: "Central 
City Pickle Co.    Cider Vinegar.    49 gal.    Peoria, Ill."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of 
this Department showed that a dilute solution of acetic acid (or dis- 
tilled vinegar) and a product high in reducing sugars and foreign 
mineral matter, prepared in imitation of cider vinegar, had been 
mixed with it and substituted wholly or in part for it. Adulteration 
of the product was alleged in the information for the reason that a 
substance, to wit, a mixture consisting of a dilute solution of acetic 
acid, or distilled vinegar, and a product high in reducing sugars and 
mineral matter had been substituted wholly or in part for the cider 
vinegar which the product purported to be. Misbranding was alleged 
for the reason that each of the barrels bore a statement regarding the 
product contained therein, to wit, "Cider Vinegar 49 gals." which 
statement, to wit, "Cider Vinegar," was false and misleading, in 
that it conveyed the impression that the product was a pure cider 
vinegar, whereas in fact it was a mixture prepared in imitation of 
cider vinegar, consisting of a dilute solution of acetic acid or distilled 
vinegar, and a product high in reducing sugars and mineral matter, 
and was not cider vinegar. Misbranding was alleged for the further 
reason that the product was labeled as aforesaid so as to mislead and
76322"—No. 2220-13
deceive the purchaser into the belief that it was a pure cider vinegar, 
whereas in fact it was an imitation of pure cider vinegar consisting of a 
dilute solution of acetic acid, or distilled vinegar, mixed with a product 
high in reducing sugars and mineral matter, and was not a pure cider 
vinegar. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason that the 
product was a mixture consisting of a dilute solution of acetic acid 
or distilled vinegar, and a product high in reducing sugars and min- 
eral matter, and was an imitation of "Cider Vinegar," the name 
under which it was. sold and offered for sale, and said mixture was 
not "Cider Vinegar," the distinctive name under which it was sold 
and offered for sale, that is to say, it was.an imitation of, and was 
offered for sale under the distinctive name of another article, to wit, 
"Cider Vinegar," whereas it was not cider vinegar.
On October 25, 1912, the defendant company entered a plea of 
guilty to the information and the court imposed a fine of $10 and 
costs.
W. M. HAYS, 
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, January 17, 1913,
2220
o