11691. Adulteration and misbranding of sirup. V. S. v. Win. T. Bailey,?
John R. Bailey, and Fred O. Bailey (Marshalltown Syrup & Sugar?
Co.). Pleas of g-uilty. Fine, $25 and costs. (F. & D. No. 15445. I. S.?
Nos. 2101-t, 2102-t, 3469-t.)
On May 16, 1922, the United States attorney for the Southern District of?
Iowa, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the District?
Court of the United States for said district an information against Wm. T.?
Bailey, John R. Bailey, and Fred O. Bailey, copartners, trading as the Mar??
shalltown Syrup & Sugar Co., Marshalltown, Iowa, alleging shipment by said?
defendants, in violation of the Food and Drugs Act, as amended, on or about?
October 21, 1920, from the State of Iowa into the State of Minnesota, of quanti??
ties of sirup which was adulterated and misbranded. A portion of the article?
was labeled in part: (Cans) "Dickinson's Pure Syrup * * * Put Up By?
Marshalltown Syrup & Sugar Co. Marshalltown, Iowa 50? Maple and 50??
Cane." The remainder of the article was labeled in part: (Bottles) " R. M.?
Dickinson's 1 Full Quart Cane and Maple Syrup 50? Cane 50? Maple Put Up?
By Marshalltown Syrup & Sugar Co. Marshalltown, Iowa."
Analyses of samples of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this de??
partment showed that it contained not more than one-third maple or maple?
sugar sirup. Examination of the quart bottles showed an average shortage in?
the contents of the bottles examined of 3.9 per cent.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason that?
a product deficient in maple sirup had been mixed and packed therewith so as?
to lower and reduce and injuriously affect its quality and had been substituted?
in part for a product composed of 50 per cent of maple sirup and 50 per cent of?
cane sirup, which the said article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, to wit, " Pare?
Syrup * * * 50? Maple and 50? Cane," borne on the labels attached to the?
cans containing a portion of the article, and the statements, to wit, " Cane and?
Maple Syrup 50? Cane 50? Maple " and " 1 Full Quart," borne on the labels?
attached to the bottles containing the remainder thereof, regarding the said?
article and the ingredients and substances contained therein, were false and?
misleading in that they represented that the said article contained not less?
than 50 per cent of maple sirup and that each of the said bottles contained 1?
quart of the article, and for the further reason that the article was labeled as?
aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it?
contained not less than 50 per cent of maple sirup and that each of the said?
bottles contained not less than 1 quart of the said article, whereas, in truth?
and in fact, the said article did contain less than 50 per cent of maple sirup?
and each of the said bottles did contain less than 1 quart of the article. Mis??
branding was alleged with respect to the product contained in the alleged quart?
bottles for the further reason that it was food in package form, and the quan??
tity of the contents was not plainly and conspicuously marked on the outside?
of the package.
On November 28, 1922, the defendants entered pleas of guilty to the informa??
tion, and the court imposed a fine of $25 and costs.
HOWARD M. GORE, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.
382	
BUREAU OF  CHEMISTRY.	
[Supplement 164,