13696. Alleged  adulteration  and  misbranding  of butter.     IT.  S.   ir.  Missis 
sippi Creameries Co., Inc. Tried to the court without a jury. 
Judgment of not guilty.     (F. & D. No. 17780.    I. S. No. 3012-v.)
On April 7, 1924, the United States attorney for the Northern District of 
Mississippi, 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 Mississippi Creameries Co., Inc., a corporation, Tupelo, Miss., 
alleging shipment by said company, in violation of the food and drugs act as 
amended, on or about August 6, 1922, from the State of Mississippi into the 
State of Georgia, of a quantity of butter which was alleged to have been 
adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: " Creamery 
Butter One Pound Net Weight."
Analysis by the Bureau of Chemistry of this department of 11 samples 
of the article showed an average of 78.05 per cent of butterfat and 18.34 per 
cent of moisture; 180 cartons showed an average net weight of 15.66 ounces.
Adulteration of the article was alleged in the information for the reason 
that a product deficient in milk fat and containing excessive moisture had 
been substituted for butter, which the said article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements " Creamery 
Butter" " One Pound Net Weight," borne on the packages containing the 
article, were false and misleading, in that the said statements represented 
that the article consisted wholly of creamery butter and that each of the 
said packages contained 1 pound net weight thereof, 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 each of 
the packages contained 1 pound thereof, whereas it did not consist wholly 
of butter but did consist in part of a product deficient in milk fat and con- 
taining excessive moisture, and each of said packages did not contain 1 pound 
net weight of butter but did contain a less amount. Misbranding was alleged 
for the further reason that the article was food in package form and the 
quantity of the contents was not clearly and conspicuously marked on the 
outside of the package.
On October 8. 1924, the defendant company having waived a jury trial and 
having entered a plea of not guilty and having denied the facts alleged in 
(he   information,   the   case  came   on   for   final   disposition   before   the   court.
i
bination  of  ingredients  capable  of producing  the  curative  and   therapeutic    j 
effects claimed in the above-quoted statements.
On May 29, 1923, no claimant having appeared for the property, judgment 
of condemnation and forfeiture was entered, and it was ordered by the court 
that the product be destroyed by the United States marshal.
It. W. DUNLAP, Acting Secretary of Agriculture.