10451.  Misbranding of  ordinary  cottonseed  cake.     TJ.   S.     *      *      *     v.  Rus- 
sell-Coleman Cotton Oil Co., a Corporation,    Plea of g-nilty.     Fine,
$25.      (F.   &   D.   No.   10892.     I.   S.   Nos.   6164-r,   10840-r,   10841-r,   10843-r, 
10848-r,  10850-r,  10851-r,  10855-r,  10857-r,  10860-r,  10861-r,  10862-r.)
On June 11, 1920, the United States attorney for the Western 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 in twelve 
counts, each count representing a separate shipment, against the Russe'l- 
Colenian Cotton Oil Co., a corporation, San Antonio, Tex., alleging shipment 
by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, on or about October 
3, September 20 and 28, October 4, 8, 3, 1, and 2, and September 30 and 28, 
1918, from the State of Texas into the State of Oklahoma, and on or about 
September 23 and October 14, 1918, from the State of Texas into the State of 
Kansas, of quantities of cottonseed cake, which, in each shipment, was mis- 
branded. All of the shipments except one were labeled in part: " * * * Or- 
dinary Cotton Sod Cake. Manufactured by Russell-Coleman Oil Mill. San 
Antonio, Texas." The shipment of October 8, 1918, into Oklahoma, wag 
labeled in part: " * * * Ordinary Cotton Seed Cake. Manufactured by 
Beeville Oil Mill Beeville, Texas."
Analyses of samples of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de: 
partment showed the following results:
Misbranding of all the article except that labeled as having been manu- 
factured  by the  Beeville  Oil Mill  was  alleged  in  the  information  for  the 
reason that the statements, to wit, " Protein Not Less Than 43.00 per cent   Fat 
Not Less Than 6.00 per cent    *    *    *    Crude Fiber Not More Than 12.00' 
per cent," borne on the tags attached to the sacks contaiaing the article, re-
garding it and the ingredients and substances contained therein, were false 
and misleading in that they represented that the article contained not less 
than 43 per cent of protein, not less than 6 per cent of fat, and not more than 
12 per cent of crude fiber, and for the further reason that the said article was 
labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief 
that it contained not less than 43 per cent of protein, not less than 6 per cent 
of fat, and not more than 12 per cent of crude fiber, whereas, in truth and 
in fact, said article did contain less than 43 per cent of protein, less than 6 
per cent of fat, and more than 12 per cent of crude fiber. Misbranding of the 
article labeled as manufactured by the Beeville Oil Mill was alleged for the 
reason that the statement, to wit, " Guaranteed Analysis: Protein Not Less 
Than 43.00 per cent * * *," borne on the tags attached to, the sacks 
containing the article, regarding it and the ingredients and substances con- 
tained therein, was false and misleading in that it represented that said 
article contained not less than 43 per cent of protein, and for the further 
reason that said article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and mis- 
lead the purchaser into the belief that it contained not less than 43 per cent of 
protein, whereas, in truth and in fact, it did contain less than 43.00 per cent 
of protein.
On April 29, 1922, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf 
of the defendant corporation, and the court imposed a fine of $25.
C. W. PUGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.