11410. Adulteration and misbranding- of cottonseed meal and misbrand??
ing: of cottonseed feed. IT. S. v. Planters Oil Co., a Corporation.?
Pleas of nolo contendere. Fine, $150. (F. & D. Nos. 9756, 12288.?
I. S. Nos. 2593-p, 17776-r.)
On July 22, 1919, and December 10, 1921, respectively, the United States?
attorney for the Southern District of Georgia, acting upon reports by the Sec??
retary of Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said?
district informations against the Planters Oil Co., a corporation, Albany, Ga.?
alleging shipment by said company, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act,?
on or about December 14, 1917, from the State of Georgia into the State of?
Florida, of a quantity of cottonseed feed which was misbranded, and on or?
about October 16, 1918, from the State of Georgia into the State of Massa??
chusetts, of a quantity of cottonseed meal which was adulterated and mis??
branded. The articles were labeled in part, respectively: "' Planco' Brand?
Cotton Seed Feed Manufactured by Planters Oil Co. Albany, Ga. Analysis:?
Protein, (6.25 times Nitrogen) 20? * * * Fibre 22? * * * Made?
exclusively from High Grade Cotton Seed Meal and Bolted Hull Bran; " " Dan??
ish Brand Cotton Seed Meal Guaranteed Analysis * * * Protein 36.00??
* * * Crude Fibre 15.00? * * * Equivalent Nitrogen 5.75? Made?
from Pressed Cotton Seed."
Analysis of a sample of the cottonseed feed by the Bureau of Chemistry of?
this department showed that it contained 17.8 per cent of protein, 29.2 per?
cent of crude fiber, and at least 66.5 per cent of cottonseed hulls. Analysis of?
a sample of the cottonseed meal by the said bur.eau showed that it contained?
33.75 per cent of protein, 15.50 per cent of crude fiber, and at least 33 per cent?
of cottonseed hulls.
Adulteration of the cottonseed meal was alleged in the information for the rea??
son that a substance, to wit, cottonseed hulls, had been mixed and packed there??
with so as to lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality and had been?
substituted in part for cottonseed meal, which the said article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged with respect to both products for the reason that?
the statements, to wit, " Protein    *    *    *    20?    *    *    *    Fibre 22?" and
216	
BUREAU  OF  CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 159,
" Made exclusively f.rom High Grade Cotton Seed Meal and Bolted Hull Bran,"?
borne on the tags attached to the sacks containing the cottonseed feed, and the?
statements, to wit, "Cotton Seed Meal Guaranteed Analysis * * *?
Protein 36.00? * * * Crude Fibre 15.00? * * * Equivalent Nitrogen?
5.75? Made from Pressed Cotton Seed," borne on the tags attached to the?
sacks containing the alleged cottonseed meal, regarding the articles and the?
ingredients and substances contained therein, were false and misleading in?
that the said statements represented that the said cottonseed feed contained?
not less than 20 per cent of protein and not more than 22 per cent of fiber and?
that it consisted exclusively of cottonseed meal and bolted hull bran, and that?
the alleged cottonseed meal was cottonseed meal, that it contained not less?
than 36 per cent of protein, not more than 15 per cent of crude fiber, not less?
than 5.75 per cent of equivalent nitrogen, and that it was prepared from?
pressed cotton seed, and for the further reason that the articles were labeled?
as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that the?
said cottonseed feed contained not less than 20 per cent of protein and not?
more than 22 per cent of fiber and that it consisted exclusively of cottonseed?
meal and bolted hull bran, and that the alleged cottonseed meal was cottonseed?
meal, that it contained not less than 36 per cent of protein, not more than 15?
per cent of crude fiber, and not less than 5.75 per cent of equivalent nitrogen,?
and that it was prepared from pressed cotton seed, whereas, in truth and in?
fact, the said articles contained less protein and more fiber than declared on?
the labels, and the said cottonseed feed did not consist exclusively of cottonseed?
meal and'bolted hull bran but did consist in part of ground cottonseed hulls,?
and the alleged cottonseed meal was not cottonseed meal and was not prepared?
from pressed cotton seed but was a mixture composed of cottonseed hulls and?
cottonseed meal, and it did contain less than 5.75 per cent of equivalent?
nitrogen.
On April 9, 1923, pleas of nolo contendere to the informations were entered?
on behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed fines in the aggre??
gate amount of $150.
C. F. MARVIN, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.