3071.?Adulteration and misbranding of mill run.   U. S. v. 1,200 Sacks of Mill Run.   Decree
of condemnation by consent.   Product released on bond.   (F. & D. No. 5152.   S. No.?
1761.)
On April 18, 1913, the United States attorney for the Western District of Missouri,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the?
United States for said district a libel for the seizure and condemnation of 1,200 sacks?
of mill run, which is a product commercially known as composed of middlings, shorts,?
and bran, being made from wheat as it goes to the rolls and being the residue after?
flour has been made therefrom, said product remaining unsold in the original unbroken?
packages and in the possession of the Joplin Hay Co., Joplin, Mo., alleging that the?
same had been shipped on January 17, February 27, and March 5, 1913, by the-New?
Era Mills, a branch of the Kansas Flour Mills Co., doing business at Arkansas City,?
Kans., and transported in interstate commerce from the State of Kansas into the State?
of Missouri, and charging adulteration and misbranding in violation of the Food and?
Drugs Act. The product was labeled: "98 Lbs. Polar Bear Mill Run. The Kansas?
Flour Mills Co.   Analysis: Protein 14.00?; fat 3.50?.    Arkansas City, Kans."
Supplement.]    SERVICE AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	289
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the libel for the reason that it contained?
5.93 per cent of a foreign material consisting chiefly of screenings which had been sub??
stituted wholly or in part for the genuine article, namely, mill run, as commercially?
known, and said product was further adulterated in that it consisted of 5.93 per cent?
of a foreign material consisting chiefly of screenings which had been mixed, packed?
with, and substituted for mill run,- as commercially known, so as to reduce, lower, and?
injuriously affect its quality and strength. Misbranding was alleged for the reason?
that the label upon the product was false and misleading in that it stated that said?
product was one commercially known as composed of middlings, shorts, and bran,?
which is the'residue left after flour has been ground from the wheat, whereas, in truth?
and in fact, the product contained 5.93 per cent of a foreign material consisting chiefly?
of screenings which had been mixed and packed with and substituted for mill run,?
and it was further misbranded in that it was offered for sale under the distinctive name?
of mill run, which is commercially known as a product composed of middlings, shorts,?
and bran, remaining after flour has been ground from the wheat, whereas, in truth and?
in fact, it was not mill run, but contained 5.93 per cent of a foreign material consisting?
chiefly of screenings which had been mixed and packed with and substituted for mill?
run, and it was further misbranded in that the label thereon misled and deceived the?
purchaser into the belief that he was purchasing mill run, commercially known as?
hereinbefore described, whereas, in truth and in fact, said product contained 5.93?
per cent of a foreign material, consisting chiefly of screenings.
On May 10, 1913, the said Kansas Flour Mills Co., claimant, having admitted the?
allegations in the libel, judgment of condemnation and forfeiture was entered and it?
was ordered by the court that the product should be sold by the United States marshal,?
or, in lieu thereof, that it should be redelivered to said claimant upon payment of all?
costs of the proceedings and execution of bond in the sum of $650 in conformity with?
section 10 of the act. (It is the view of this department that mill run is commercially?
known as a product composed of middlings, shorts, and bran, remaining after flour has?
been ground from the wheat, as it goes to the rolls.)
B. T. GALLOWAY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, April 14, 1914.