15858. Adulteration   and   misbranding  of   ontter.    U.   S.  v.   Pend  D'Oreille
Creamery Co.    Plea of gnilty.     Fine, $390.     (F; & D. No. 22528.     I. S. 
Nos. 10751-x, 10752-x, 10753-x, 10756-x, 10757-x.)
On December 23, 1927, the United States attorney for the District of Mon- 
tana, 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 Pend 
d'Oreille Creamery Co., a corporation, trading at Plains, Mont., alleging ship- 
ment by said company, in violation of the food and drugs act as amended,
in various consignments from the State of Montana into the State of Idaho, 
on or about April 27, April 28, May 1, and May 3, 1927, respectively, of 
quantities of butter, a portion of which was misbranded and the remainder 
of which was adulterated and misbranded. The article was labeled in part: 
" 16 Ounces Idaho State Creamery Butter Manufactured By Pend d'Oreille 
Creamery Company Sandpoint, Idaho, Plains, Mont."
Adulteration was alleged in the information with respect to a portion of the 
article for the reason that a product which contained less than 80 per cent 
by weight of milk fat had been substituted for butter, 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, which the said article purported to be.
Misbranding was alleged for the reason that the statements, to wit, " Butter," 
with respect to a portion of the product, and " 16 Ounces," with respect to all 
of the said product, borne on the labels, were false and misleading in that 
the said statements represented that the said portion of 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 law, and that the packages each contained 16 
ounces thereof, 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 
said portion was butter, to wit, a product which should contain not less than 
80 per cent by weight of milk fat, and that the said packages each contained 
16 ounces thereof, whereas the said portion of the article was a product which 
contained less than 80 per cent by weight of milk fat, and each of the packages 
containing the article contained less than 16 ounces thereof. Misbranding 
was alleged with respect to all the product for the further reason that it was 
food in package form and the quantity of the contents was not plainly and 
conspicuously marked on the outside of the package.
On May 26, 1928, a .plea of guilty to the information was entered on behalf 
of the defendant company, and the court imposed a fine of $390'.
ARTHUR M. HYDE, Secretary of Agriculture.