L0514. Adulteration and Misbranding of apple cider, eider vinegar, dis- 
tilled vinegar, and distilled white vinegar. V. S. * * * v. 
Cornelias "William Davis (C. W. Davis & Son). Collateral of $150 
forfeited. (F. & D. No. 15000. I. S. Nos. 8652-t, 8674-t, 8675-t, 8676-t, 
8677-t,  8682-t, 8683-t, 8685-t, 16790-r, 16791-r.)
On January 18, 1922, the United States attorney for the District of Columbia, 
?acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the Police Court 
of the District aforesaid an information against Cornelius William Davis, trad- 
ing as C. W. Davis & Son, Washington, D. C, alleging that between the dates 
of April 26 and November 17, 1920, the said company did oifer for sale and sell 
at the District of Columbia, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, 
certain quantities of apple cider, cider vinegar, and distilled vinegar which were 
adulterated and misbranded. The articles were labeled in part, respectively : 
" Contents 32 Ozs. Pure Apple Cider * * * C. W. Davis & Son, * * * Washing- 
ton, D. C. "; " Pure Cider Vinegar * * * 16 Oz. "; " Analostan Brand Distilled 
Spirit Vinegar Colored * * * "; " Analostan Brand High Grade Distilled 
White Vinegar * * *    "
Analyses of samples of the articles by the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department showed the presence of added water. Examination of the articles 
bj the said bureau showed a portion of the apple cider and all the so-called 
" Pure Cider Vinegar " to be short in volume.
Adulteration of the articles was alleged in the information for the reason 
that a substance, to wit, water, had been mixed and packed therewith so as to 
lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality and strength and had been 
substituted in part for plire apple cider, pure cider vinegar, vinegar, or high 
grade distilled white vinegar, which the said articles purported to be.
Misbranding of the articles was alleged in substance for the reason that the 
?statements, to wit, " Pure Apple Cider, " " Contents 32 Ozs.," " Pure Cider 
Vinegar Made From The Juice of Fresh Apples 16 Oz., " " Distilled Spirit 
Vinegar, " " High Grade Distilled White Vinegar, " borne on the labels attached 
to the bottles containing the respective articles, regarding the said articles and 
the ingredients and substances contained there'n, were false and misleading 
in that the said statements represented that the articles consisted wholly of 
pure apple cider, pure cider vinegar, distilled spirit vinegar, or dist'lled white 
vinegar, as the case might be, that a portion of the bottles containing the said 
apple cider contained 32 fluid ounces thereof and that each of the bottles con- 
taining the said cider vinegar contained 16 fluid ounces thereof, 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 consisted wholly of pure apple 
cider, pure cider vinegar, distilled spirit vinegar, or distilled white vinegar, as 
the case might be, that a portion of the bottles containing the said apple cider 
contained 32 fluid ounces thereof and that each of the bottles containing the said 
cider vinegar contained 16 fluid ounces thereof, whereas, in truth and in fact, 
the said articles did not consist wholly of pure apple cider, pure cider vinegar, 
distilled spirit vinegar, or distilled white vinegar, as the case might be, but 
'did consist in part of added water, a portion of the bottles containing the said 
apple cider contained less than 32 fluid ounces thereof, and the bottles containing 
the said cider vinegar contained less than 16 fluid ounces thereof. Misbranding 
was alleged for the further reason that the articles were products composed
9657-22 2
in part of added water prepared in imitation of pure apple cider, pure cider 
vinegar, distilled spirit vinegar, or distilled white vinegar, as the case might 
be, and were offered for sale and sold under the distinctive names of other 
articles, to wit, pure apple cider, pure cider vinegar, distilled spirit vinegar, 
or distilled white vinegar. 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 respective pack- 
ages.
On January 18, 1922, the defendant having failed to enter an appearance, 
the $150 collateral which had been deposited by him to insure his appearance 
was declared forfeited by the court.
C. W. PUGSTIET, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.