5251. Misbranding of cottonseed meal and cake and cottonseed meal or 
cake. U. S. * * * v. Cottonseed Products Co., a corporation 
(K,off Oil & Cotton Co.).    Plea of guilty.    Fine, $95 and costs.     (F. &
D. No. 7659.    I.  S. Nos.  13004-1,  13005-1,  10069-1,  10071-1,  10076-], 10078-1, 
12314-1,  12315-1.)
On November 27, 1916, the United States attorney for the Eastern District 
of Oklahoma, 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 Cottonseed Products Co., a corporation, doing business under the name of 
the Roff Oil & Cotton Co., Roff, Okla., alleging shipment from the State of 
Oklahoma by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or 
about March 2 and 3, 1916, into the State of Nebraska; on February 12, 14, 
and 19, 1916, into the State of Kansas; on February 14, 1916, and February 
15, 1916 (2 shipments), into the State of Missouri, of quantities of cottonseed 
meal and cake, and cottonseed meal or cake, which were misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article from the shipments on March 2 and 3, 
1916, into Nebraska, by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department showed 
respectively:
No. 1. No. 2.
Ether extract (percent) 
6.47 6.48
Protein (N x 6.25)   (per cent) 
36.9 34.5'
Crude fiber  (per cent) 
12.6 13.9
The above results show that the product in each case contained 
less protein and more fiber than was stated on the label.
27044°—18 1 
287
Analysis of a sample from the shipments of February 12 and 14, 1916, into
Kansas and Missouri showed, respectively:
No. l. No. 2.
Nitrogen  (percent) 
5.65 5.23
Protein (N x 6.25)   (per cent) 
35.3 32.69
Ammonia  (percent) 
6.87 6.35
Ether extract (percent) 
6.5 5.7
Crude fiber  (per cent) 
13.9 15.2
The above results show that the product in each case contains 
less ammonia, less protein, less nitrogen, less oil or fat, and more 
crude fiber than it was labeled to contain. 
Analysis of a sample from the shipments of February 14 and 19, 1916, into 
Kansas, and of the shipments of February 15, 1916, into Missouri showed, re- 
spectively :
No. 1. No. 2. No. 3. No. 4.
Protein (N x 6.25)   (percent) 34.91 33.50 35.69 33.69
Ether extract (crude fat) (per cent) __    6. 7       5. 9 6.10 6. 35
Crude fiber (per cent) 
14. 3 15. 98 13. 55 14. 03
The above results show that the product in each case contains 
less protein and more crude fiber than it was labeled to contain.
Misbranding of the article in all of the shipments except that of February 
12, 1916, into Kansas, and February 14, 1916, into Missouri, was alleged in 
the information for the reason that the statements regarding said article and 
the ingredients and substances contained therein appearing on the labels, to 
wit, " Guaranteed Analysis Crude Protein not less than 41 per cent * * * 
Crude Fibre not more than 9i per cent" (or " Guaranteed Analysis Protein 
41 to 43% * * * Fibre not more than 12%," as the case might be), were 
false and misleading in that they indicated to purchasers thereof that the said 
article contained not less than 41 per cent of crude protein and not more than 
9J per cent of crude fiber (or that it contained not less than 41 per cent of 
protein and not more than 12 per cent of fiber, as the case might be) ; and 
for the further reason that the article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive 
and mislead purchasers into the belief that it contained not less than 41 per 
cent of crude protein, and not more than 9| per cent of crude fiber (or not 
less than 41 per cent of crude protein and not more than 12 per cent of fiber), 
when, in truth and in fact, it contained less than 41 per cent of crude protein 
and more than 9| per cent crude fiber (or less than 41 per cent of protein 
and more than 12 per cent of fiber).
Misbranding of the article in the shipments of February 12, 1916, into Kansas, 
and February 14, 1916, into Missouri, was alleged in substance in the infor- 
mation for the reason that the statement regarding the article and the in- 
gredients and substances contained therein, appearing on the labels, to wit, 
" * * * Guaranteed Analysis Ammonia 8 to 8i per cent, Protein 41 to 43 
per cent, Nitrogen, 6 to 61 per cent, Oil or Fat 7 to 9 per cent, Crude Fibre 8 
to 12 per cent," was false and misleading in that it indicated to purchasers 
thereof and was such as to deceive and mislead purchasers into the belief 
that the said article contained not less than 8 per cent of ammonia, 41 per 
cent of protein, 6 per cent of nitrogen, 7 per cent of oil or fat, and not more 
than 12 per cent of crude fiber, when, in truth and in fact, it contained less 
than 8 per cent of ammonia, 41 per cent of protein, 6 per cent of nitrogen, 
and 7 per cent of oil or fat, and more than 12 per cent of crude fiber.
On January 2, 1917, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the 
information, and the court imposed a fine of $95 and costs.
E. A. PEARSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.