4557. Adulteration and misbranding of ground clioeoHate. U. S. * * * v..?
Hiadson Gram Co., (inc.), a corporation. Plea of guilty. Fine, $10.?
(F. & D. No. 6815.     I. S.No. 23212-h.)
On March 2, 1916, the United States attorney for the District of Oregon,?
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 Hudson?
Gram Co., (Inc.), a corporation, Portland, Oreg., alleging shipment by-said com??
pany, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about June 10, 1914, from?
the State of Oregon into the State of Washington, of a quantity of ground?
chocolate which was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled:?
" H & G Brand Ground Chocolate Net Weight 8 oz. H & G Brand Packed?
for The Hudson & Gram Co. Inc. Portland."
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this?
department showed the following results:
Water, sugar, and?
fat-free basis.
Moisture   (per  cent)?
    2.80
Ash, total (per cent)?
    2.70
Ash, water-insoluble (percent)-?
    1.75?7.80
Water-insoluble ash in total ash (per cent)__?64
Alkalinity of soluble ash (cc N/10 HC1 per ash of
1 gram)?
   0.9
Fat   (per cent)?
16.03
Fat, water- and sugar-free basis (per cent)?31.65
Melting point of fat (?C.)?
32-34
Kefractive index of fat at 40? C?
    1.4574
Crude  fiber   (per  cent)?
    2.08?6.01
Sucrose, by polarization  (per cent)?
46.56
Lactose,  by polarization?
None.
Microscopic examination does not show added starch.?
A sweetened cocoa and not a chocolate.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason?
that a substance, to wit, sugar, had been substituted in part for ground choco??
late, which the article purported to be, and for the further reason that a valuable?
constituent of ground chocolate, to wit, cocoa fat, had been in part extracted.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement, to wit, "Ground?
Chocolate," borne on the label of the article, was false and misleading in that?
it represented that the article was ground chocolate, and deceived and misled?
the purchasers thereof into the belief that it was ground chocolate, whereas, in?
truth and in fact, it was not, but was a mixture consisting of ground-cocoa?
and sugar.
On March 3, 1916, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the?
information, and the court imposed a fine of $10.
CARL VKOOMAN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture,
86	
BUREAU   OF   CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 22.