6167. Adulteration and misbranding of so-called pure apple cider vinegar. U. S. * * * v..?
Derwood Dawson and L. Jacob Dawson (Dawson Bros. Mfg. Co.). Pleas of guilty.?
Fine, $100 and costs.   (F. & D. No. 8235.   I. S. No. 4484-L.)
On July 18, 1917, the United States attorney for the Northern District of Georgia,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the?
United States for said district an information against Derwood Dawson and L. Jacob?
Dawson, doing business as Dawson Bros. Mfg. Co., Atlanta, Ga., alleging shipment?
by said defendants, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about April 24,1916,?
from the State of Georgia into the State of South Carolina, of a quantity of an article?
labeled, "Dawson Bros. Mfg. Co., Atlanta, Ga., Southern Beauty Brand Pure Apple?
Cider Vinegar, Diluted to 4 ? Acid Strength," which was adulterated and misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department?
showed the following results:
Glycerol (gram per 100 cc)?
    0. 16
Solids (grams per 100 cc)?
    1. 62
Nonsugar solids (grams per 100 cc)?
    1.15
Reducing sugar after evaporation, before inversion (gram per 100 cc).      . 47
Ash (gram per 100 cc)?
Ash in nonsugar solids (per cent)?
 22. 6
Acidity, as acetic (grams per 100 cc)?
    3. 96
Fixed acid, as malic (gram per 100 cc)?
031
Alcohol (per cent by volume)?
    1. 3
Analysis indicates added distilled vinegar and mineral matter.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason that sub??
stances, to wit, dilute acetic acid or distilled vinegar and mineral matter, had been?
mixed and packed therewith so as to reduce and lower and injuriously affect its?
quality and strength, and had been substituted in part for pure apple cider vinegar,?
which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement, to wit', "Pure Apple?
Cider Vinegar," borne on the label of the article, regarding the ingredients and sub??
stances contained therein, was false and misleading in that it represented that the arti??
cle was pure apple cider vinegar; and for the further reason that it was labeled as?
aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it was pure?
apple cider vinegar, whereas, in truth and in fact, it was not, but was a mixture com??
posed in part of dilute acetic acid or distilled vinegar and mineral matter.
On March 29, 1918, the defendants entered pleas of guilty to the information, and?
the court imposed a fine of $100 and costs.
CARL VROOMAN,?
Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
196	
BUREAU  OF   CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 54.