7629. Adulteration and snisTUx-andinj? of feed xneal. U. S. * * * v. Snel- 
labarger Elevator Co., a coruoi-ation. Plea of griiilty. Fine, Jj?50 
and costs.    (F. & T>. No. 10771.    I. S. No. 10676-r.)
On December 15, 1919, the United States attorney for the Southern District 
of Illinois, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Dis- 
trict Court of the United States for said district an information against the 
Shellabarger Elevator, Co., a corporation, Decatur, Ill., alleging shipment by 
said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about June 7, 1918, 
from the State of Illinois into the State of Indiana, of a quantity of an article, 
labeled in part " Feed Meal," which was adulterated and misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the article made in the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department showed the following results:
Per cent.
Ether extract (crude fat) 
2.62
Crude  protein 
8. 69
Article consists principally of a product from yellow and white 
corn with the addition of what appeared to be ground screenings, 
consisting of pieces of wheat, oats, kafir, weed seeds, and chaff.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason that 
a substance, to wit, screenings, had been mixed and packed therewith so as to 
lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality, and had been substituted in 
part for feed meal compounded from corn feed meal, which the article purported 
to be.
Misbranding of the article was alleged for the reason that the statements, to 
wit, " Not less than 3.0 per cent of crude fat, 9.0 per cent of crude protein " and 
" Compounded from the following ingredients: Corn Feed Meal," borne on the 
tags attached to the sacks containing the article, regarding it and the ingredients 
and substances contained therein, were false and misleading in that they rep- 
resented that the article contained not less than 3 per cent of crude fat and 9 
per cent of crude protein and was compounded from corn feed meal, and for 
the further reason that it was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead 
the purchaser into the belief that it contained not less than 3 per cent of crude 
fat and 9 per cent of crude protein and was compounded from corn feed meal, 
whereas, in truth and in fact, it contained less than 3 per cent of crude fat 
and less than 9 per cent of crude protein and was not compounded from corn 
feed meal, but was a mixture consisting of corn feed meal and screenings; and
for the further reason that it was a mixture consisting of corn feed meal and 
screenings and was offered for sale under the distinctive name of another 
article, to wit, feed meal compounded from corn feed meal.
On January 19, 1920, the defendant company entered a plea of guilty to the 
information, and the court imposed a fine of $50 and costs.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.