6712. Adulteration and misbranding- of tomatoes. tJ. S. * * * V. VreA J,?
Bron* (Peoria Canning- Co.). Plea of nolo contendere. Fine, $25?
and costs.     (F. & D. No. 9059.    I. S. No. 11812-p.)     '
On October 2, 1918, the United States attorney for the Southern 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?
Fred J. Brons, trading as the Peoria Canning Co., Peoria, 111., alleging the?
sale and delivery by the said defendant, on or about January 18, 1917, in?
violation of the Food and Drugs Act, under a guaranty that the article was?
not adulterated or misbranded within the meaning of the said act, of a quantity?
of an article labeled in part, " Wilson's Brand Tomatoes," which was adul??
terated and misbranded -within the meaning of the said act, and which said?
article in the identical condition in which it was received was shipped by the
240	
BUBEAU  OF  CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement G5,
purchaser thereof on November 1, 1917, from the State tiii Illinois into the?
State of Iowa, in further violation of said act.
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this?
department showed from the immersion refractometer readings of the juice?
at 20?C. the addition of water.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in substance in the information for?
the reason that a substance, to wit, water, had been mixed and packed there??
with so as to lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality and strength,?
and had been substituted in part for tomatoes, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding of the article
" was alleged for the reason that the statement, to?
wit, " Tomatoes," borne on the labels attached to the cans containing the article,?
regarding it and''the ingredients and substances contained therein, was false?
and misleading in that it represented that said article consisted exclusively of?
tomatoes, and for the further reason that it was labeled as aforesaid so as to?
deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it consisted exclusively?
of tomatoes, whereas, in truth and in fact, it did not so consist, but consisted?
in part of added water.
On April 26, 1919, the defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to the in??
formation, and the court imposed a fine oC $25 and costs.
J. R. RIGGS, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.