2988. Adulteration and misbranding ol vanilla extract. IT. S. v. West India Manufacturing? Co. Plea of nolo contendere. Fine, $20 and costs. (F. &D. No. 4864. I. S. No. 2301-e.) On November 7, 1913, the United States attorney for the Eastern District of Mis?? souri, 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 West India Manufac?? turing Co., a corporation, St. Louis, Mo., alleging shipment by said company, in vio?? lation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about July 25, 1912, from the State of Missouri? into the State of Florida, of a quantity of so-called vanilla extract which was adul?? terated and misbranded. The product was labeled: "The West India Mfg. Co. St.? Louis, U. S. A. Concentrated Extract Vanilla. * * * Directions for Syrup: To? each gallon of syrup add two ounces Extract Vanilla, one ounce Gum Foam; darken? with Sugar Color. No. 3828. Guaranteed under Food and Drugs Act, June 30,1906." Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department? showed the following results: Ethyl alcohol (per cent by volume)? ?32.24 Methyl alcohol? ?None. Coloring matter: No caramel. Vanillin (per cent by weight)? ?0.104 Coumarin? ?None. Vanilla resins by dealcoholizing: Somewhat deficient. Winton lead number? ?0.40 Adulteration of the product was alleged in the information for the reason that a? substance, to wit, a dilute extract of vanilla, had been mixed and packed therewith in? such a manner as to reduce and lower and injuriously affect its quality and strength,? and, further, in that a substance, to wit, a dilute extract of vanilla, had been substituted? wholly or in large part for the genuine article. Misbranding was alleged for the reason? that the statement "Concentrated Extract of Vanilla," borne on the label, was false? and misleading, because it misled and deceived the purchaser into the belief that the? product was a genuine vanilla extract, conforming to the commercial standard for such 210 BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY. [April, 1914. an article, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not such, but was a diluted vanilla? extract, and was further misbranded in that it was labeled and branded so as to deceive? and mislead the purchaser, being labeled "Concentrated Extract of Vanilla," thereby-? purporting that it was genuine vanilla extract, conforming to the commercial standard? for such article, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not such, but was a diluted vanilla? extract. On November 12,1913, the defendant company entered a plea of nolo contendere to? the information and the court imposed a fine of $20 and costs. B. T. GALLOWAY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture. WASHINGTON, D. C, March 30,1914-