3094. Adulteration and alleged misbranding of beer. U. S. v. Berghoff Brewing Association.?
Plea of guilty to second count of indictment. Fine, $100 and costs. First count of?
indictment nolle pressed.   (F. & D. No. 5205.   1. S. No. 37906-e.)
At the November, 1913, term of the District Court of the United States for the Dis??
trict of Indiana, the grand jurors of the United States within and for said district,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, returned an indictment against?
the Berghoff Brewing Association, a corporation, Fort Wayne, Ind., alleging shipment?
by said association, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on July 15, 1912, from the?
State of Indiana into the State of Louisiana, of a quantity of beer which was adul??
terated and alleged to have been misbranded. The product was labeled: (Principal?
label) "Berghoff Brewing Association Pure Hop and Malt Salvator Beer style Fort?
Wayne, Ind. Guaranteed by the Berghoff Brewing Assn. under the Food and Drugs?
Act, June 30, 1906." (Neck label) "This Beer is Brewed Double Strength out of?
the Choicest Malt and Hops Only. And intended for table use and Especially Recom??
mended by Physicians as very Nourishing and Strengthening to the Sick and Con??
valescent."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department?
showed the following results:
Alcohol (per cent by volume)?
?5. 67
Extract (per cent by weight)?
?7.42
Extract original wort (per cent by weight)?
?16. 50
Degree fermentation?
?55. 03
Volatile acid as acetic (grams per 100 cc)?
?0. 019
Total acid as lactic (grams per 100 cc)?
?0. 243
Maltose (per cent)?
?2. 26
Dextrin (per cent)?
?3. 50
Ash (per cent)?
?0. 216
Proteid (per cent)?
?0. 557
P205 (per cent)?
?0. 086
Undetermined (per cent)?
?0. 88
Polarization, undiluted, 200 mm tube (?V.)?
?+50. 8
Color (degrees in J-inch cell, Lovibond)?
?19
Adulteration of the product was charged in the second count of the indictment for?
the reason that a product brewed from malt, hops, and other cereal products had?
been substituted in part for a product brewed from hops and malt only. Misbranding?
was charged in the first count of the indictment for the reason that the statements?
"Pure Hop and Malt Salvator Beer" and "This Beer is Brewed Double Strength out?
of the Choicest Malt and Hops Only," so printed and apparent on the labels attached?
to said bottles containing the product aforesaid, regarding the ingredients contained?
in said bottles aforesaid, were false and misleading in that said product was not
Supplement.]    SERVICE  AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	305
brewed double strength out of the choicest malt and hops, but, in truth and in fact,?
said product was brewed from malt, hops, and cereal products.
On December 16, 1913, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the?
second count of the indictment, charging adulteration of the product, and the court?
imposed a fine of $100 and costs. The first count of the indictment, charging mis??
branding of the product, was nolle pressed.
B. T. GALLOWAY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, April 14, 1914-