6327.  Misbranding of cottonseed meal  or  (and)   cake.     U.   S.     *      *     *     v. 
Mangum Cotton Oil Mill Co., a corporation.    Plea of guilty.    Fine,
$150 and costs.    (F. & D. No. 7786.    I. S. Nos. 10054-1, 19852-1, 19853-1.)
On January 22, 1917, the United States attorney for the Western 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 
Mangum Cotton Oil Mill Co., a corporation, Mangum, Okla., alleging shipment 
by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about January 
11, 1916, and January 13, 1916, from the State of Oklahoma into the State of 
Iowa, and on or about January 14, 1916, from the State of Oklahoma into the 
State of Missouri, of quantities of an article labeled in part, " Cotton Seed 
Meal or" ("and") "Cake," which was misbranded.
Analyses of samples of the article in each shipment by the Bureau of Chem- 
istry of this department showed, respectively, the following results:
No. 1. No. 2. No. 3.
Crude fiber  (per cent) 
14.8
Total nitrogen  (per cent) 
5.64
Total ammonia (per cent) 
7.21 7.13 6.86
Crude protein (per cent) 
37.1 36.6 35.3
Nos. 1 and 2 contain less ammonia and protein than is declared 
on the label.
No. 3 contains less ammonia, protein, and nitrogen, and more 
crude fiber than is declared on the label.
Misbranding of the article in the shipments of January 11 and 13, 1916, was 
alleged in the information for the reason that the statement borne on the tags 
attached to the sacks, regarding the article and the ingredients and substances 
contained therein, to wit, " Guaranteed Analysis * * * Ammonia * * * 
8 to 8i% Protein * * * 41 to 43%," was false and misleading in that 
it represented that said article contained not less than 8 per cent of ammonia 
and not less than 41 per cent of protein; and for the further reason that the 
article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into 
the belief that it contained not less than 8 per cent of ammonia and not less than 
41 per cent of protein, whereas, in truth and in fact, it contained less than 8 per 
cent of ammonia and less than 41 per cent of protein, to wit, approximately 7.21 
(or 7.13) per cent of ammonia and approximately 37.1 (or 36.6) per cent of pro- 
tein. Misbranding of the article in the shipment of January 14,1916, was alleged 
for the reason that the statement regarding it and the ingredients and sub- 
stances contained therein, borne on the tags attached to the sacks, to wit, 
" Guaranteed Analysis: Ammonia 8 to 8J Per cent. Protein 41 to 43 Per cent. 
Nitrogen 6 to 6J Per cent. * * * Crude Fiber 8 to 12 Per cent," was 
false and misleading in that it represented that said article contained not less 
than 8 per cent of ammonia, not less than 41 per cent of protein, not less than 
6 per cent of nitrogen, and not more than 12 per cent of crude fiber; and for 
the further reason that the article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive 
and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it contained not less than 8 
per cent of ammonia, not less than 41 per cent of protein, not less than 6 per 
cent of nitrogen, and not more than 12 per cent of crude fiber, whereas, in 
truth and in fact, said article contained less than 8 per cent of ammonia, less 
than 41 per cent of protein, less than 6 per cent of nitrogen, and more than 
12 per cent of crude fiber, to wit, approximately 6.86 per cent of ammonia, 
approximately 35.3 per cent of protein, approximately 5.64 per cent of nitrogen, 
and approximately 14.8 per cent of crude fiber.
On April 4, 1917, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the 
information, and the court imposed a fine of $150 and costs.
R. A. PEARSON, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.