31577. Adulteration and misbranding1 ?* canned tomatoes. U. S. v. Rufus 
G. layman, J. Wilbur Layman, Lowell JV. Layman (R. G. Layman 
& Sons). Pleas of guilty. Fine, $50 and costs.. (F. & D. No. 17244. 
I. S. No. 18242-t.)
On July 24, 1923, the United States attorney for the Western District of 
Virginia, acting upon a report by the Secretary of Agriculture, filed in the 
District Court of the United States for said district an information against 
Rufus G. Layman, J. Wilbur Layman, and Lowell N. Layman, copartners, 
trading as R. G. Layman & Sons, Cloverdale, Va., alleging shipment by said 
defendants, in violation of the food and drugs act, on or about February 1, 
1922, from the State of Virginia into the State of Texas, of a quantity of 
canned tomatoes which were adulterated and misbranded. The article was 
labeled in part: (Can) " Springdale Brand Hand Packed Tomatoes * * * 
Packed By R. G. Layman & Sons Cloverdale, Va."
Analysis of a sample of the article by the Bureau of Chemistry of this 
department  showed  that  it contained  added   water.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that water had been mixed and packed therewith so as to lower and reduce 
and injuriously affect its quality and strength and in that added water had 
been substituted for tomatoes, which the article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statement, to wit, 
" Tomatoes," borne on the labels attached to the cans containing the article, 
was false and misleading, in that it represented that the said article con- 
sisted wholly of tomatoes, 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 consisted wholly of tomatoes, whereas it did not so consist but 
did consist in part of added water.
On August 8, 1923, the defendants entered pleas of guilty to the informa- 
tion, and the court imposed a fine of $50 and costs.
R. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.