10620.?Adulteration and misbranding of sirup.     TJ.  S.     *      *     *     v. Dunbar
Molasses & Syrup Co., a Corporation.     Plea of guilty.     Fine, $30.
(F, & D. No. 10043.    I. S. No. 16031-r.)
On September 27, 1919, the United States attorney for the Eastern District?
of Louisiana, 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 Dunbar Molasses & Syrup Co., a corporation, New Orleans, La., alleging?
shipment by said company, on or about April 17, 1918, in violation of the?
Food and Drugs Act, as amended, from the State of Louisiana into the State?
of Florida, of a quantity of sirup which was adulterated and misbranded.?
The article was labeled in part: " Dunbar's White Star Brand Syrup Packed?
By Dunbar Molasses & Syrup Co., New Orleans, La.    *    *    *."
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed that the product was a mixture of glucose and molasses,?
containing added water, and that the cans containing the same contained less?
than the declared quantity.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason that?
substances, to wit, glucose and added 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 sirup, which the said article?
purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, to wit, " Syrup,"?
" Corn Syrup And Sugar House Molasses," and " Contains 9 Lbs.?3 Ozs.,"?
borne on the labels attached to the cans containing the article, regarding the?
said article and the ingredients and substances contained therein, were false?
and misleading in that the said statements represented that the article was?
sirup, that it was corn sirup and sugar house molasses, and that each of the?
said cans contained 9 pounds and 3 ounces of the said article, 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 was sirup, that it was corn
350	
BUREAU  OF   CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 143,
sirup and sugar house molasses, and that the contents of each of the said?
cans was 9 pounds and 3 ounces, whereas, in truth and in fact, the said?
article was not sirup, it was not corn sirup and sugar house molasses, and?
each of the said cans did not contain 9 pounds and 3 ounces of the said?
article but did contain a less amount. Misbranding was alleged for the?
further reason that the article was a product composed in part of glucose?
and added water, prepared in imitation of, and offered for sale and sold under?
the distinctive name of, another article, to wit, sirup; and for the further?
reason that it was food in package form, and the quantity of the contents was?
not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside of the packages.
On December 19, 1921, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on?
behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $30.
0. W. PTJGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.