13409. Misbranding   of   butter.     U.   S.   v.   Hanford   Produce   Co.     Pleas   of
guilty. Fines, $200 and costs. (F. & D. Nos. 18728, 18753. I. S. Nos. 
671-v, 672-v, 692-v, 678-v, 679-v, 694-v, 695-v, 7321-v, 15058-v, 15065-v, 
15066-v, 15068-v.)
On July 18 and September 17, 1924, respectively, the United States attorney 
for the Northern District of Iowa, acting upon reports by the Secretary of 
Agriculture, filed in the District Court of the United States for said district 
two informations against the Hanford Produce Co., a corporation, Sioux 
City, Iowa, alleging shipment by said company, in violation of the food and 
drugs act, in various consignments, namely, on or about May 23, 26, and 30, 
1923, respectively, from the State of Iowa into the District of Columbia, on 
or about January 19 and February 2, 1924, respectively, from the State of 
Iowa, into the State of Maryland, and on or about February 9, 1924, from 
the State of Iowa into the State of Alabama, of quantities of butter which 
was misbranded. The product consigned February 9, 1924, into Alabama 
was labeled in part: " 1 Lb. Net Weight Hanfords * * * Fancy Creamery 
Butter * * * Hanford Produce Co., Sioux City, Iowa." The remainder 
of the said product was labeled in part:  " Creamery Butter."
Analyses by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department of 74 samples, 5 
samples, and 47 samples taken from the shipments into the District of Colum- 
bia, Alabama, and Maryland, respectively, showed an average of 78.7 per 
cent, 79 per cent, and 77.7 per cent, respectively, of milk fat, and 16.8 per 
cent, 16.2 per cent, and 16.9 per cent, respectively, of moisture. Examination 
of 50 packages of the product consigned February 9, 1924, into Alabama 
showed that the average net weight was 15.58 ounces.
that the statement, to wit, " Creamery Butter," borne on the packages con- 
taining the said article, and the statement " 1 Lb. Net Weight," borne on 
the packages containing the portion of the product consigned February 9, 1924, 
into Alabama, were false and misleading, in that the said statements repre- 
sented that the article consisted wholly of butter, and that the packages con- 
tained 1 pound net of butter, and for the further reason that it was labeled 
as aforesaid so as to deceive and mislead the purchaser into the belief that it 
consisted wholly of butter and that the packages contained 1 pound net of 
butter, whereas the article did not consist wholly of butter but did consist 
of a product deficient in milk fat and containing an excessive amount Of 
moisture, and each of the packages did not contain 1 pound net of butter but 
did contain a less amount. Misbranding was alleged for the further reason 
that the statement "Butter," borne on the labels, was false and misleading, 
in that it represented that the article was butter, to wit, a product which 
should contain not less than 80 per cent by weight of milk fat, as prescribed 
by the act of March 4, 1923, whereas it did not contain 80 per cent by weight 
of milk fat but did contain a less amount.
On May 29, 1925, pleas of guilty to the informations were entered on behalf 
of the defendant company, and the court imposed fines in the aggregate 
amount of $200, together with the costs of the proceedings.
R. W. DTTNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.