12966. Misbranding: of feed.     U. S. v. the Scott County Milling- Co., a Cor 
poration. Plea of grnilty. Fine, $200. (F. & D. No. 18339. I. S. Nos. 
9126-v, 9128-v.)
On September 10, 1924, the United States attorney for the Eastern District 
of Missouri, 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 Scott County Milling Co., a corporation, Sikeston, Mo., alleging shipment 
by said company, in violation of the food and drugs act, on or about January 17, 
1923, and July 16, 1923, respectively, from the State of Missouri into the State 
of Mississippi, of quantities of feed which was misbranded. A portion of the 
article was labeled in part: (Tag) " Gristo Milk Maker Analysis: Protein 
16%%, Fat 4%. * * * Carbohydrates 60% * * * Scott County Milling 
Co. Sikeston, Dexter, Oran, Mo." The remainder of the said article was 
labeled in part: (Tag) " Gristo Work Feed 90% Grain * * * Scott County 
Milling Co."
Analysis of a sample of the Gristo milk maker by the Bureau of Chemistry 
of this department showed that it contained 12.46 per cent of protein, 1.73 per 
cent of fat, and 50.72 per cent of carbohydrates. Examination of the Gristo 
work feed by said bureau showed that it contained 72.88 per cent of grain.
Misbranding of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that   the  statement,   to   wit,   "Analysis: Protein   16%%,   Fat   4%    *    *    *
Carbohydrates 60%," with respect to the milk maker feed, and the statement 
"90% Grain," with respect to the work feed, borne on the respective labels, 
were false and misleading, in that the said statements represented that the 
milk maker feed contained not less than 16% per cent of protein, not less- 
than 4 per cent of fat, and not less than 60 per cent1 of carbohydrates, and 
that the work feed contained not less than 90 per cent of grain, and for the 
further reason that the article was labeled as aforesaid so as to deceive and 
mislead the purchaser into the belief that the milk maker feed contained not 
less than 16 per cent of protein, not less than 4 per cent of fat, and not less 
than 60 per cent of carbohydrates, and that the work feed contained not less 
than 90 per cent of grain, whereas.the said milk maker feed contained less 
than 16% per cent of protein, less than 4 per cent of fat, and less than 60 
per cent of carbohydrates, and the work feed contained less than 90 per cent 
of grain.
On October 14, 1924, a plea of guilty to the information was entered on 
behalf of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $200.
W. M. JAEDINE, Secretary of Agriculture.