8439.?Adulteration  anil  mialti'anding; of honey.     IT.  S.     *     *     *     v.  Swift &
Co., si. Corporation.     Plea of guilty.     Fine, $100.     (F.  & D. No.  12S09.?
I.  S.  No.  2797-r.)
On August 18j 1920, the United States attorney for the District of Oregon,?
acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court?
of the United States for said district an information against Swift & Co., a?
corporation, doing business at Portland, Oreg., alleging shipment by said com??
pany, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about July 30, 1919, from?
the State of Oregon into the State of Washington, of a quantity of an article,?
labeled in part " Queen Bee Brand California Honey * * * California Honey?
Company, Portland, Oregon," which was adulterated and misbranded.?
. Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed that it contained about 35 per cent of commercial glucose.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason?
that a substance, to wit, commercial glucose, 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 honey, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement " Honey," borne?
on the labels attached to the bottles containing the article, regarding it and the?
ingredients and substances contained therein, was false and misleading in that?
it represented that the article consisted wholly of honey, and for the further?
reason that it was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the pur??
chaser into the belief that said article consisted wholly of honey, whereas, in?
truth and in fact, it did not so consist, but consisted in part of commercial glucose.
On August 26, 1920, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf?
of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $100.
E. D. BALL, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.