8335.  Adulteration and misbranding of peppermint essence.     U. S. v. Royal?
Chemical Works.     Plea  of guilty.    Fine, $100 and  costs.     (F.  &  D.
No. 3778.    I.  S. No.  17347-c.)
On August 4, 1913, the United States attorney for the Northern District?
of Illinois, 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 Royal Chemical Works, a corporation, Chicago, 111., alleging shipment by?
said company, in vio]ation of the Food and Drugs Act, on December 12, 1910,?
from the State of Illinois into the State of Wisconsin, of a quantity of so-called?
peppermint essence which was adulterated and misbranded. The product was?
labeled: (On shipping tag) "10 gals, pepp (yellow) See A. M. S. From Royal?
Chemical Works, 1245-1257 Garfield Ave., Chicago."
Analysis of a sample of the product by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed the following results:
Specific gravity at 15.6? C?
0. 9287
Alcohol (per cent by volume)?
    52.96
Methyl alcohol: None.
Solids (grams per 100 cc)?
     0.06
Peppermint oil (per cent by volume)?
     0.40
Color: Naphthol Yellow S.
Adulteration of the product was alleged in the information for the reason?
that oil of peppermint in the quantity of not less than 3 per centum by volume?
is an essential ingredient of the article of food known as peppermint essence,?
whereas a certain dilute essence of peppermint containing not more than 0.4?
of 1 per centum by volume of oil of peppermint had been mixed and packed?
with the article of food aforesaid in such a manner as to reduce and lower and?
injuriously affect the quality and strength of the article. Adulteration was?
alleged for the further reason that oil of peppermint in the quantity of not?
less than 3 per centum by volume is an essential ingredient of the article of?
food known as peppermint essence, whereas a certain dilute essence of pepper??
mint containing not more than 0.4 of 1 per centum by volume of oil of pepper??
mint had been substituted wholly or in part for the aforesaid essential quantity?
of oil of peppermint in the article of food. Adulteration was alleged for the?
further reason that the article of food aforesaid had been colored in a manner
544	
BUREAU OF CHEMISTRY.	
[July, 1914.
whereby its inferiority was concealed. Misbranding of the product was alleged?
for the reason that said article was an imitation of another article of food,?
to wit, genuine peppermint essence, in that oil of peppermint in the quantity of?
not less than 3 per centum by volume is an essential ingredient of the article?
of food known as genuine peppermint essence, whereas the article of food?
aforesaid consisted of a certain dilute peppermint essence containing not more?
than 0.4 of 1 per centum by volume of oil of peppermint. Misbranding was?
alleged for the further reason that the article consisted of a certain dilute?
solution of peppermint essence containing not more than, to wit, 0.4 of 1 per?
centum by volume of oil of peppermint, and was offered for sale, invoiced, sold,?
and delivered under the distinctive name of another article of food, to wit,?
genuine peppermint essence.
On December 15, 1913, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the?
information, and the court imposed a fine of $100 and costs.
C. F. MARVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
WASHINGTON, D. C, August 14, 1914.