10070.?Misbranding of cottonseed  meal and cake.     U.  S.     *      *     *     v.  Dal?
las Oil & Refining Co., a Corporation,     Plea of guilty.     Fine, $25.
(F. & D. No. 8570.    I. S. Nos. 20347-m, 20348-m.)
On March 6, 1918, the United States attorney for the Northern District of?
Texas, 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 Dallas?
Oil & Refining Co., a corporation, Dallas, Tex., alleging shipment by said com??
pany, on or about February 28, 1917, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act,?
as amended, from the State of Texas into the State of Kansas, of quantities?
of cottonseed meal and cottonseed cake which were misbranded.
Analysis of a sample of the cottonseed cake by the Bureau of Chemistry of?
this department showed that it contained approximately 39.75 per cent of?
protein. Analysis of a sample of the cottonseed meal by said bureau showed?
that it contained approximately 38.57 per cent, of protein and 13.97 per cent?
of crude fiber.
N. J. 10051-10100]   SERVICE AND REGULATORY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	43
Misbranding of the articles was alleged in the information for the reason?
that the statement, to wit, " Guaranteed Analysis Protein 43 per cent. * * *?
Crude Fibre 10 to 12 per cent," borne on the tags attached to the sacks con??
taining the cottonseed meal, and the statement, " Guaranteed Analysis Protein?
43 per cent," borne on the tags attached to the sacks containing the cottonseed?
cake, regarding the said articles and the ingredients and substances contained?
therein, were false and misleading in that the said statements represented that?
the articles contained not less than 43 per cent of protein and that the cotton??
seed meal contained not more than 12 per cent of crude fiber, and for the?
further reason that the articles were labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive?
and mislead the purchaser into the belief that they contained not less than 43?
per cent of protein and that the cottonseed meal contained not more than?
12 per cent of crude fiber, whereas, in truth and in fact, the said articles did?
contain less than 43 per cent of protein, to wit, 38.57 and 39.75 per cent,?
respectively, and the said cottonseed meal did contain more than 12 per cent?
of crude fiber, to wit, 13.97 per cent. Misbranding was alleged for the further?
reason that the articles were food in package form, and the quantity of the?
contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the?
packages.
On June 22, 1921, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf?
of the defendant company, and th.e court imposed a fine of $25.
O. W. PTJGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.