11122.?Misbranding of cottonseed meal,    TJ. S. v. Kershaw Oil Mill, a Cor?
poration.     Plea   of   guilty.    Fine,   $200.     (F.   &   D.   No.   15565.    I.   S.?
Nos. 9085-t, 9283-t, 9284-t, 92851-t.)
At the October, 1922, term of the United States District Court within and?
for the Western District of South Carolina, the United States attorney for said?
district, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the dis??
trict court aforesaid an information against the Kershaw Oil Mill, a corpora??
tion, Kershaw, S. C, alleging shipment by said company, in violation of the?
Food and Drugs Act, as amended, in various consignments, namely, on or?
about January 25, and April 20, 21, and 22, 1921, respectively, from the State of?
South Carolina into the State of North Carolina, of quantities of cottonseed?
meal which was misbranded. The article was labeled in part: (Tag) "100?
Pounds 'Palmetto Brand' Good Cotton Seed Meal Manufactured by Kershaw?
Oil Mill Kershaw, South Carolina."
Examination of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department?
showed that the sacks contained less than the amount declared on the labeling?
thereof.
N.J. 11101-11150.]    SERVICE  AND REGULATOEY ANNOUNCEMENTS.	69
Misbranding of the article in each shipment was alleged in the information?
for the reason that the statement, to wit, " 100 Pounds," borne on the tags at??
tached to the sacks containing the article, regarding the said article, was false?
and misleading in that it represented that each of the said sacks contained?
100 pounds of the article, and for the further reason that it was labeled as?
aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that?
each of the said sacks contained 100 pounds of the article, whereas, in truth?
and in fact, each of the said sacks did not contain 100 pounds of the said?
article, but did contain a less amount. Misbranding of the article in each?
shipment was alleged* for the reason that the article was food in package form,?
and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on?
the outside of the package.
On November 10, 1922, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on?
behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $200.
C. W. PUGSLEY, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.